Volokh Conspiracy Commenter ReaderY Makes The Big Time!

Comment on this blog = reaction "from the Stanford Law School" = "negative reaction of the legal community."

From plaintiff's pro se filing in Afrasiabi v. Morgan, quoting a comment by commenter ReaderY to the post "Spy" vs. "Spy" (+ Piers Morgan, President Biden, and the Iranian Nuclear Weapons Program):

Plaintiff's Letter to Judge Brian Murphy Regarding the Negative Reaction of the Legal Community to the Order of Dismissal

I write this letter to bring to Your Honor's attention a sample of negative reactions in the legal community to the Order of dismissal of the complaint, entered on November 25, 2025.

This one from the Stanford Law School, correctly pointing out the huge and significant differences between a crime of moral turpitude, i.e., spying, and a FARA disclosure violation. In fact, Your Honor's own order admits to such a huge difference and, yet, papers over its own insight by dismissing the action any way, contrary to the spirit of American justice;--As I plan to submit my Motion For Reconsideration in the next several days, I hope that Your Honor puts this matter in proper perspective with respect to the likely damage to the image of a fair and impartial justice for time to come if this unfair decision, manifesting a clear error of law, is not modified. The above-said reaction (link below) is worth quoting at length:

"I think the judge is wrong here.

It's like accusing somene with an unregistered gun or smeone selling loose cigarettes without a license of being a violent criminal, someone with unregistered plates of dangerous driving, or accusing an unregistered corporate agent - e.g. a registered corporate agent with an expired registration - of corporate espionage.

Registration is a regulatory formality. Failure to registure is an administrative offense. There is nothing inherently morally wrong about occasionally forgetting to fill out a form or not realizing one has to or incorrectly believing one doesn't. It's completely legal to represent foreign powers as long as one has filled out the right forms.

Spying, on the other hand, is a crime of moral turpitude and connotes an analog of treason. There is no comparison between the two.

The judge here is completely off his rocker for equating a purely administrative offense with no connotation of moral turpitude with an act that not only is fraught with moral turpitude, it is widely regarded as a profound breach of loyalty and trust, a betrayal of ones country.

To think the effect on ones reputation is in any way similar is just crazy." {https://reason.com/volokh/2025/11/25/spy-vs-spy-piers-morgan-president-biden-and-the-iranian-nuclear-weapons-program/}

I thought it was a thoughtful and interesting comment, but I don't think the plaintiff was entirely candid in representing its context and where it was from.

Plaintiff also filed a motion for reconsideration, which the judge denied without opinion.

Comments

[Michael P]

The plaintiff's description of the context and source seem just as sound as the underlying comment.

The moral sting of being a spy is being a secret (undisclosed) agent of a foreign power. It's more like calling anl company's unregistered lobbyist a shill than accusing them of corporate espionage -- the specific act(s) as an agent might refute the accusation, but it normally aligns well with what a typical reader will understand the label to mean.

[Kazinski]

Nice. But that's the big time?

That's as good as it gets?

[Bored Lawyer]

He should get a promotion. Let's call him "Reader X."

[Stupid Government Tricks]

Reader Why?

Reader XY?

Reader Y'?

[Bwaaah]

I remember when he was just Reader Y.

[Bwaaah]

I remember when Ready Y was a regular commenter. But then he sold out...needed to go for the big time.

Remember the people you meet on the way up, 'cause you're mistaken...you're still at the bottom...with a bunch of unquoted commenters.

You can forget me for this, but that'll change nothing.

[Sarcastr0]

That’s pretty awesome.