Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by rs186 201 days ago
It is not the reader's fault if the article is unreadable in the first place.

Not to mention that asking help to explain a text is extremely common. I can read English, but I have never read a US supreme court ruling. There are much better ways for me to understand those rulings to me as a non-lawyer.
2 comments
tyre 201 days ago
Many SCOTUS opinions, especially the major ones, are very readable! The justices and clerks are excellent writers.

The most publicly notable cases (on things like abortion, gerrymandering, gun control, etc.) aren’t so tied down in complex precedent or laws the average person is unfamiliar with.

Although, even some of those (like, for me, issues around Native American sovereignty or maritime law) are quite readable as well.

link
turtlesdown11 200 days ago
> I can read English, but I have never read a US supreme court ruling. There are much better ways for me to understand those rulings to me as a non-lawyer.

Having admitted to never having read a SCOTUS ruling, how can you then proclaim there are better ways for you to understand? How could you possibly make that assertion if you've never read a SCOTUS ruling?

link
rs186 200 days ago
SCOTUS ruling: 213 page PDF.

News article: 500 words that provide everything I need to know.

Unless I am actually very interested in the ruling, this seems an easy choice. Because I just wouldn't open that PDF file at all.

link
jcranmer 200 days ago
> Having admitted to never having read a SCOTUS ruling, how can you then proclaim there are better ways for you to understand? How could you possibly make that assertion if you've never read a SCOTUS ruling?

A SCOTUS ruling is a primary source, and there's a pretty good universal rule that primary sources can be difficult to properly digest if you don't fully have the context of the source; for most people, reading a secondary source or a tertiary source will be a superior vehicle than the primary source for understanding. Although that said, some secondary and tertiary sources do end up being just utter garbage (a standard example is the university press release for any scientific paper--the actual merits of that paper is generally mangled to hell.)

link
turtlesdown11 196 days ago
> pretty good universal rule that primary sources can be difficult to properly digest if you don't fully have the context of the source

I guess the last refuge of the ignorant is denial

link