Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-12-16 06:13:44 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: B49D9CDD161C2999090F4B1A1CFBA472764278E170BEA83304B20767EF047CA3
Participant Details

Original Note:

SCOTUS didn't reject hearing of a final judgement. It was what's known as an "interlocutory appeal" of a preliminary order. SCOTUS is historically unlikely to take on interlocutory appeals. This should not be assumed to be a decision on the constitutionality of the AW ban. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5DiT8oWy1k

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1735736701778268476
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - B49D9CDD161C2999090F4B1A1CFBA472764278E170BEA83304B20767EF047CA3
  • createdAtMillis - 1702707224223
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • 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 - 1735736701778268476B49D9CDD161C2999090F4B1A1CFBA472764278E170BEA83304B20767EF047CA3