Reason Magazine
•Attending Oral Argument in Trump v. Anderson
Summary
Nutrition label
73% Informative
Dean Obeidallah: Arguments did not go exactly as I expected, but it was a very rewarding experience.
Griffin 's Case, which was barely mentioned in Petitioner 's opening brief, occupied a lot of the argument.
Justice Kagan interrupted Justice Jackson , and joked about that "officer stuff" Justice Sotomayor referred to us as "some scholars".
VR Score
85
Informative language
88
Neutral language
59
Article tone
semi-formal
Language
English
Language complexity
43
Offensive language
not offensive
Hate speech
not hateful
Attention-grabbing headline
not detected
Known propaganda techniques
not detected
Time-value
medium-lived
External references
3
http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-719/298687/20240129181015058_23-719%20Motion%20For%20Leave%20Oral%20Arg.pdfhttp://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-719/295290/20240109145107356_23-719%20Amicus%20Brief%20Professors%20Barrett%20and%20Tillman%20Final.pdfhttps://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4568771
Source diversity
2