Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2022-10-03 23:18:13 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: EEA39E8B4AB1BEFA47B775A2CE4DCDDD073841F27C81F5E281FC7C6F7F045296
Participant Details

Original Note:

Accepting a previous ruling as the current law of the land but eventually issuing a contradictory ruling to it is not perjurious by nature. The Supreme Court Justices in question merely demured to stare decisis. https://jonathanturley.org/2022/05/04/no-conservative-justices-did-not-commit-perjury-in-confirmation-on-reversing-roe/

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1540835880994234369
  • participantId - EEA39E8B4AB1BEFA47B775A2CE4DCDDD073841F27C81F5E281FC7C6F7F045296
  • raterParticipantId -
  • createdAtMillis - 1664839093980
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - NOT_HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 0
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1540835880994234369EEA39E8B4AB1BEFA47B775A2CE4DCDDD073841F27C81F5E281FC7C6F7F045296