Birdwatch Note Rating
2024-06-22 01:54:50 UTC - HELPFUL
Rated by Participant: C417FF0C1D5A30ED375E8A412B9E92A57A5395C6A7E6954C6A5E2CDF4AFD9714
Participant Details
Original Note:
Thomas's dissent states unconvicted people should not be deprived of their rights in a civil court which has fewer civil rights protections than a criminal court. Reich's characterization that Thomas believes convicted abusers should still have access to firearms is untrue. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-915_8o6b.pdf
All Note Details