Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-12-07 06:21:41 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 3206DB55B269D1DC275592F2F2DAA41786D3CBB79C1F189D8DF32C79D0E8505E
Participant Details

Original Note:

Lee is not to Laughlin but Hotel v. Parrish (1937) as the SCOTUS "stitch in time that saved nine" reversal of its jurisprudence. Other subsequent cases, like Wickard v. Filburn (1942) absolutely did reimagine/reinterpret commerce clause. https://mason.gmu.edu/~dcurrie/English_344/Photo_Remix.html

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1865077854125621755
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 3206DB55B269D1DC275592F2F2DAA41786D3CBB79C1F189D8DF32C79D0E8505E
  • createdAtMillis - 1733552501576
  • 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 - 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 - 18650778541256217553206DB55B269D1DC275592F2F2DAA41786D3CBB79C1F189D8DF32C79D0E8505E