[judofyr]

> … but it seems like the judge simply doesn't get the objections. And the reasoning is really strange

The full order is linked in the article: https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/NYT-v.... If you read that it becomes more clear: The person who complained here filed a specific "motion to intervene" which has a strict set of requirements. These requirements were not met. IANAL, but it doesn't seem too strange to me here.

> Also, rejecting something out of hand simply because a lawyer didn't draft it seems really antithetical to what a judge should be doing. There is no requirement for a lawyer to be utilized.

This is also mentioned in the order: An individual have the right to represent themselves, but a corporation does not. This was filed by a corporation initially. The judge did exactly what a judge what supposed to do: Interpret the law as written.

[yieldcrv]

So the arguments are sound but the procedure wasnt followed so someone else just needs to follow the procedure and get our chats deletable?

[otterley]

The judge went further to say the arguments weren't sound, either.

[Aeolun]

They went further and said they didn’t find the arguments sound.

Personally I find it really hard to see anything sound in the initial order.