Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-07-04 12:11:09 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: D35BC5F5E4F17548332E37B607B412240117F16C93D43F2DC90F6DB18D9D1D38
Participant Details

Original Note:

The alleged request from Stewart was not mentioned in the SCOTUS opinion and played no part in the outcome. The plaintiff had standing to bring the case because she established a credible threat of prosecution. The dissent did not mention standing because it was not in dispute. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-476_c185.pdf

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1676017385281835008
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - D35BC5F5E4F17548332E37B607B412240117F16C93D43F2DC90F6DB18D9D1D38
  • createdAtMillis - 1688472669598
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 1
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1676017385281835008D35BC5F5E4F17548332E37B607B412240117F16C93D43F2DC90F6DB18D9D1D38