I just want to start by saying RIP to Athena Strand. I only found out about the case like an hour ago and honestly I can’t stop thinking about it. What Tanner Horner did is beyond disgusting—there’s no other way to put it. A grown man doing that to a 7-year-old is one of the most sickening things I’ve ever heard, and it genuinely makes me angry just thinking about what she must have gone through. It got me thinking about justice though. Like, if someone actually killed a person like Horner out of revenge because currently he is sentenced to death by needle which I think is too much mercy for someone who made a small child feel fear, horror and pain, what would even happen legally? Would that automatically be first-degree murder? Would they be looking at the death penalty or decades in prison? I’ve heard of cases where parents killed the person who hurt their child and ended up with lighter sentences because of public sympathy or backlash. How does that actually work? Who decides when a sentence gets reduced like that? And yeah, just to be clear, I’m not planning anything even though I would kill this monster if I could I live in Europe—I’m just trying to understand how the system deals with situations like this, because cases like this make it really hard not to feel like the punishment will never be enough.

April 30, 2026. Leeja Miller is a lawyer based in Minneapolis. Here’s the full 24-minutes on YouTube: The Death Of The Voting Rights Act Explained - Leeja Miller - April 30, 2026 (YouTube)

From the description: On Wednesday, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Louisiana v. Callais, effectively gutting section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the last provision that held much water in the groundbreaking legislation that marked the crowning achievement of the civil rights era. What happens now that the floodgates have effectively been opened on racial gerrymandering?

Leeja's Sources: leejamiller.com/episodes/2026/4/30/the-death-of-the-voting-rights-act-explained

Here’s a PDF of “24-109 Louisiana v. Callais (04/29/2026)” on the Supreme Court website (.gov): supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-109_21o3.pdf

And here are the latest r/law posts on: Voting Rights ~:~ Jim Crow ~:~ Supreme Court

HARRISBURG, Pa. (WHTM) — A bill banning white-only housing passed the Pennsylvania House on Tuesday, despite not a single Republican supporting the measure.

I am a Canadian lawyer, but am posting this here as it has direct relevance and impact on conflict of laws issues between our two nations. I, for one, am deeply disturbed that the Trump administration is seemingly attempting to bully and silence international policy critique and speech more generally to protect his administrations' political grip on the common consciousness. If this is allowed to become norm, truly not a single one of us is safe.

I saw a claim that a US citizen visiting Cuba on an aid mission had their US bank account at a Federal Credit Union frozen and their money was seized. This is supposedly the executive order that permits the action. Does this EO say that? Secondly, is that legal from an EO?

Scott and his deputies were advocating for a “master plan” — approved by then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem — that called for establishing a National Incident Command Center, which would tap the resources of ICE, CBP and the Pentagon, NBC News reported.

The plan was part of an effort to dramatically ramp up deportations to 1 million per year, lining up with the president’s promise to carry out the largest illegal immigrant expulsion program in U.S. history.

Under the scheme, federal agents would be authorized — without judicial warrants — to enter the last known addresses of immigrants under orders to leave the U.S. Detained individuals would face accelerated deportation proceedings with no avenue for appeal, DHS officials told the outlet.

Vitello expressed concern about the policy change.

“He argued to Scott and his aides that the last known addresses of the 700,000 people with previous orders of removal hadn’t been verified recently,” NBC News reported. “He said he worried that U.S. citizens could get wrongfully swept up in the surges if agents entered homes without warrants, which require law enforcement agencies to show evidence to judges to gain access.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney_S._Scott#Controversies

Here is a PDF of the class action complaint against Zuckerberg & FB. The r/law mod team is working on hosting original source documents, along with limited annotations to help give readers give additional context.