if they were sincere they wouldn't have done it to begin with (just a note). justia put the opinions back in the original form . . . after they were caught and the damage was done. i think leo has found some traces still lingering. i'm on too much percocet after yesterday to grab my notes and follow up on that comment. check with danae or give me a couple of days.
Hi Guys.
Justia put Robots.txt on their entire site when we reported in October. There is now no way to know what they changed by using the WaybackMachime.
One must go an compare the text they put up against a subscription site like Lexis or Westlaw, or have a SCOTUS Court Reporter to tell if they are actually presenting the full text of the case. At first they put up disclaimer up stating that they weren’t responsible if the text wasn’t exact. Then they changed that to stating that it was the text of the case, NOT the FULL text of the case.
Do not use Justia. They cannot be trusted.
You will only make more work for yourself by using them because you have to check ever darned thing they publish. Same goes for any company using SCOTUS feeds from Public.Resource.org, and that includes Cornell Law.
Pretty damn sad isn’t it?