#legal administrative

[eternityparalegalservices]

Managing legal admin tasks in-house diverts valuable time from core responsibilities. This hidden cost impacts overall productivity, leading to inefficiencies and missed opportunities to focus on high-priority tasks.

[gleditsia-triacanthos]

life has gone so crazy lately, forgot my sense of humor, so here’s information and advice for my u.s. citizens:

an executive order is not a law. you will see lists circulating of a thousand executive orders trump has made in the past week, but be aware that the constitutionality of those orders are (knowing him) limited, and people and groups are already fighting them through the courts.

immigrants, here both legally and not, are at the most imminent risk. ice raids have begun. regardless of immigration status, i highly recommend checking out immigrantjustice.org and propagating it as a resource. know your rights and the rights of your community members.

things to do:

- chose one issue you care deeply about and organize around it. i’m usually a believer in intersectionality, and it’s important not to overlook how social issues are connected, but trying to mitigate all of the abuses happening in the country right now as an individual is not possible.

- don’t tune out, but control your stream of information. limit your time online, especially if your feed is highly political. vet your news sources. you should not expect to feel normal when reading about the current administration, but avoiding all-out panic and despair is important. believing things are hopeless is self-fulfilling.

- easier said than done, but try to avoid in-fighting. trump-supporting american conservatives (more appropriately, regressives) present a far more united front than those who oppose them. this isn’t to say we should abandon controversial issues, but to focus our efforts on the greatest existing threat and not each other.

peace, love + all of the above. stay safe!

[onlytiktoks]

[reasonsforhope]

Federal regulators on Tuesday [April 23, 2024] enacted a nationwide ban on new noncompete agreements, which keep millions of Americans — from minimum-wage earners to CEOs — from switching jobs within their industries.

The Federal Trade Commission on Tuesday afternoon voted 3-to-2 to approve the new rule, which will ban noncompetes for all workers when the regulations take effect in 120 days [So, the ban starts in early September, 2024!]. For senior executives, existing noncompetes can remain in force. For all other employees, existing noncompetes are not enforceable.

[That's right: if you're currently under a noncompete agreement, it's completely invalid as of September 2024! You're free!!]

The antitrust and consumer protection agency heard from thousands of people who said they had been harmed by noncompetes, illustrating how the agreements are "robbing people of their economic liberty," FTC Chair Lina Khan said. 

The FTC commissioners voted along party lines, with its two Republicans arguing the agency lacked the jurisdiction to enact the rule and that such moves should be made in Congress...

Why it matters

The new rule could impact tens of millions of workers, said Heidi Shierholz, a labor economist and president of the Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning think tank. 

"For nonunion workers, the only leverage they have is their ability to quit their job," Shierholz told CBS MoneyWatch. "Noncompetes don't just stop you from taking a job — they stop you from starting your own business."

Since proposing the new rule, the FTC has received more than 26,000 public comments on the regulations. The final rule adopted "would generally prevent most employers from using noncompete clauses," the FTC said in a statement.

The agency's action comes more than two years after President Biden directed the agency to "curtail the unfair use" of noncompetes, under which employees effectively sign away future work opportunities in their industry as a condition of keeping their current job. The president's executive order urged the FTC to target such labor restrictions and others that improperly constrain employees from seeking work.

"The freedom to change jobs is core to economic liberty and to a competitive, thriving economy," Khan said in a statement making the case for axing noncompetes. "Noncompetes block workers from freely switching jobs, depriving them of higher wages and better working conditions, and depriving businesses of a talent pool that they need to build and expand."

Real-life consequences

In laying out its rationale for banishing noncompetes from the labor landscape, the FTC offered real-life examples of how the agreements can hurt workers.

In one case, a single father earned about $11 an hour as a security guard for a Florida firm, but resigned a few weeks after taking the job when his child care fell through. Months later, he took a job as a security guard at a bank, making nearly $15 an hour. But the bank terminated his employment after receiving a letter from the man's prior employer stating he had signed a two-year noncompete.

In another example, a factory manager at a textile company saw his paycheck dry up after the 2008 financial crisis. A rival textile company offered him a better job and a big raise, but his noncompete blocked him from taking it, according to the FTC. A subsequent legal battle took three years, wiping out his savings. 

-via CBS Moneywatch, April 24, 2024

--

Note:

A lot of people think that noncompete agreements are only a white-collar issue, but they absolutely affect blue-collar workers too, as you can see from the security guard anecdote.

In fact, one in six food and service workers are bound by noncompete agreements. That's right - one in six food workers can't leave Burger King to work for Wendy's [hypothetical example], in the name of "trade secrets." (x, x, x)

Noncompete agreements also restrict workers in industries from tech and video games to neighborhood yoga studios. "The White House estimates that tens of millions of workers are subject to noncompete agreements, even in states like California where they're banned." (x, x, x)

The FTC estimates that the ban will lead to "the creation of 8,500 new businesses annually, an average annual pay increase of $524 for workers, lower health care costs, and as many as 29,000 more patents each year for the next decade." (x)

Clearer explanation of noncompete agreements below the cut.

Noncompete agreements can restrict workers from leaving for a better job or starting their own business.

Noncompetes often effectively coerce workers into staying in jobs they want to leave, and even force them to leave a profession or relocate.

Noncompetes can prevent workers from accepting higher-paying jobs, and even curtail the pay of workers not subject to them directly.

Of the more than 26,000 comments received by the FTC, more than 25,000 supported banning noncompetes. 

[political-us]

[my-midlife-crisis]

Something seems similar about these

[alwaysbewoke]

[still-searching-for-something]

[somesmartsmarties]

Listen Lloyd I realize you’ve got a lot going on right now, what with the forbidden five escaping and your visions but you could not have picked a worse lawyer if you’d tried

+ bonus doodle

Bro we are not winning this court trial

[teeth-wanted]

Proposal for one (1) Telsa Problem:

Okay, call me an idiot who is way too generous, but I was raised on this principle: don't give people too much credit. I guarantee, people are way dumber than you think. To be fair, it's not *sheer* stupidity. Humans as a species are hard-wired to consciously and unconsciously make life relatively more comfortable when given the opportunity. Being comfortable in late-stage capitalism means thriving from others' stolen labor. People who can afford Teslas aren't free from this sin. Neither are we.

Point 1: gurl we gotta give some grace to the fuckheads who are now realizing their investments tie them to a Nazi. Yes, it took them wayyyyy too long to get this this realization, but I say be positive. Be glad they're here now.

Anyways, I was watching some videos that talked about how Teslas and Tesla-owners are being attacked due to the growing public outrage towards Musk and his actions. In a lot of these, we hear Tesla owners lamenting the losses they've accumulated since the election and how they can't get rid of the cars no matter how hard they try.

Point(s) 2 & 3: A lot of people want to vent their rage on Teslas. A lot of Tesla-owners want to get rid of Teslas.

My proposal is this: so like, does anyone wanna help me start a charity or campaign in which we'd legally buy unwanted Teslas that had been verifiably purchased prior to the 2025 inauguration (like, proof of purchase or a title or something like that) and allow our righteously angry fellow Americans (or like, whoever buys a $5 ticket or makes a donation) the chance to beat the shit out of those cars like it's the world's greatest Rage Room.

Financial and Administrative Support Needed for the Following Items (nonexhaustive):

Acquiring suitable protective gear (PPE)

Rage Room insurance (the usual stuff a business would have)

Locating and legally securing land for the proposed demolition sites

Training and maintaining staff (first aid, de-escalation, etc.)

Securing funds to pay off Tesla-owners remaining payments (not including any interest accrued if financed with a bank or credit union outside of Tesla or Musk's domain)

Advertisement/social media (like, not much. I can do this myself, actually, but like it is something to consider)

Do I like the idea of paying off Tesla debts? Fuck no. I'm a housekeeper. I've been lower class/below the poverty line most my life. I'm beyond pissed off by the state of our government.

But I can't get ahold of my congressman. He's refusing to hold public town halls, like many others throughout the country. The Trump Administration is drooling at the any and all chances to demonize the American public's justified outrage, and I'm sick and tired of having my voice shot down. Words are not enough, and all of our actions are being weaponized against us.

And, at the end of the day, we can't keep hurting each other when we have more dangerous threats ahead. If buying some rich guy's Tesla and letting him and his fellow angry voters take a sledgehammer to it for an hour or five, if that's what it takes for people to find an inch of common ground, if that's what it takes for me to be able to legally smash the shit out of an overpriced lemon of a fascist symbol, fuck it. I want it.

And I think, deep down, ya'll want that, too.

Intended Outcomes of Proposal:

Providing a legal and effective venue to vent frustrations regarding the current administration.

Allowing previous Tesla-owners some grace and space within the anti-Tesla community (ie most of the sane world rn)

Strengthening ties between the impacted economic classes and unifying their anger towards the actual tyrants that are screwing us all over

Emphasizing the height of the American public's outrage by using newly acquired rage room footage to advertise and reach concerned Tesla-owners and partners who have unwanted Tesla merchandise and stocks.

TLDR: people are stupid and suck and lets all be nicer to each other and legally smash unwanted Tesla cars.

I will be taking notes, thank you for your consideration :)

[elowai]

WARNING: Even if you are legal in the USA & Latino — GET OUT OF THE COUNTRY IMMEDIATELY FOR YOUR SAFETY

I have a Latino bf. His family is wealthy and fled Venezuela (2010-2014) and immigrated to the US. Some are citizens, others are documented with temporary status. Either way — THEY ARE GETTING DETAINED BY ICE (La Migra). Worst of all — SOME ARE BEING SENT TO GUANTANAMO BAY. ICE doesn’t care what US Passport or type of Visa (student or work) you may have — THEY WILL TAKE YOU. His aunt is fleeing and we don’t know what will happen to her. They are taking people off of planes, on the street, and from their homes (no matter how legal or Trump loving they are).

I am so ready to throw up again. My bf still thinks he is safe to come here in the Fall for law school. He isn’t. He would be on a J1 visa which doesn’t matter here in the US anymore. You will be sent to a camp (like Guantanamo) or any of the other ones being built down south (private prisons being constructed aka labor camps). YES — THIS IS HAPPENING!!!!!! This is what is being reported. I’m sick to my stomach.

Yes, LIBERTY IS DYING WITH THUNDEROUS APPLAUSE. THE COUP IS HAPPENING. WAKE THE FUCK UP BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE.

[indecisiveavocado]

a whole new level of awful: donald trump directly contradicts the constitution, potentially turning presidents into kings

Yesterday, Donald Trump directly contradicted the Constitution in an executive order.

Wait, what's an executive order?

An executive order is a direction by the President to agencies, often legally binding. They're often quite boring. The first executive order issued this year (2025) was establishing a chain of succession in some obscure office.

Executive orders are common, but not incredibly so. Since 1937, the most prolific president in absolute terms was FDR, with 2023, and the least prolific Biden, with 160. If you account for the varying numbers of years, the most prolific was still FDR, with around 252 per year, and the least prolific Obama, with around 35 per year. That's not a huge number.

The critical thing about executive orders is that there is no congressional process. None. They are made by the President's whims, and can be used to effectively pass laws that could not be passed otherwise. For instance, Executive Order 9066, by FDR, established the Japanese-American internment camps. Congress did not review this; the only way to challenge it was via the courts. Similarly for Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation. Executive Order 12127, by Jimmy Carter, established FEMA. Other executive orders have prohibited discrimination in the federal and sometimes civilian workforce, established the Peace Corps, created the National Labor Relations Board, and, much more recently, banned travel from many Muslim-majority countries to the US as part of Trump's Muslim ban. Again, there is almost no oversight. The only way to fight this is via the courts.

What does this one say, and how does that contradict the Constitution?

This executive order states, effectively, that if someone is born in the US but has a parent who is undocumented, they are not a US citizen. This directly contradicts the Fourteenth Amendment, which states "All persons born...in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States".

What are the consequences of this if it's allowed to stand?

If it is allowed to stand, it will have two far-reaching consequences that will change American democracy and turn into, effectively, a kingdom.

The first change is based on the fact that executive orders would now be elevated above the Constitution, thus meaning any executive order Trump signs--and remember, there are no restrictions on these--would be law.

The second change would be that there would be no recourse. There would be no way to fight back against it save by appealing to the goodness of his heart (of which, of course, there is none), because, after all, what appeal can be made? If it's above the Constitution, it's also above any other law that might be invoked to show it's illegal. In other words, if upheld as legal, this executive order would elevate executive orders, and with them the President, to the unchallengeable supreme law of the land.

It would turn the president--right now that's Trump, God save us all--into a king.

Will it be allowed to stand?

I don't know. The Supreme Court has shown some slight backbone, but overall it has pretty much yielded to Trump. Unless two or more typically conservative justices--so two of Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, or Barrett--stray from Trump's party line, that order will probably be upheld. I don't think they'll do so; after all, doing so would basically remove their power. But I'm not as confident as I'd like to be.

Basically, our democracy's continuation is now in the hands of six awful people.

Is there anything I can do?

Not really. I mean, yes, lobby, call your congresspeople, mail them angry letters, support your local library, all that jazz. But honestly, there isn't so much you can do when it's at this scale. (Unless, of course, you're Trump or a Supreme Court justice. In which case, hi, please stop this!) Just knowing about it and sharing that knowledge will help.

[onlytiktoks]

[generallemarc]

Heard a radio ad by the DHS that was basically a campaign ad

I know it was them because they said they were the ones who paid for it at the end. It was full of dramatic music and campaign-style talk about Trump's immigration crackdown. Supposedly it was directed at illegal immigrants, telling them to leave of their own volition and they would be allowed a chance to return legally, but I would be very interested to hear of literally any examples of criminals deciding to cease doing whatever law-breaking activities they're doing because an advertisement told them "hey, stop doing that and maybe one day you'll get to do it legally". But the worst part by far was the references it made to "weak politicians"-I don't care if Trump wants to insult everyone under the sun, but while no names were named it could not be more obvious to which former government officials he was referring, and that was done with my tax dollars, and yours, and everyone else's. As far as I'm concerned Trump just used tax money for a campaign ad, and he didn't even do it during an actual fucking campaign. Hope the lawsuit was worth, what, trying to boost two special elections to the Mississippi state house and some ballot measures in Louisiana? Anything else happening electorally this month I'm missing?

This is absurd and nobody should be supporting this. It would be a total waste of money anyways, because again there are no criminals who stop breaking the law because the government asks them to on the radio, but with this added in it's easily the worst thing he's done so far that hasn't 1. killed anyone(sad that that's just something Presidents do now, but 9/11 sure was a thing 24 years ago) or 2. been done explicitly in the name of bigotry(the trans army ban and passport bs).

[political-us]

[my-midlife-crisis]