You are not very observant. Leo posted all 25 the the day I first published on it on the 21st. Not only that, I saw the live pages. We sent the links to other members of the press so we know, other journalists know what was live, before Justia blocked the wayback machine. Leo predicted they would. He was right, and Justia did the exact same thing in Aug 2011.
Your rock is there to the left. Its missing you.
“Leo posted all 25 the the day I first published on it on the 21st.”
Excellent. I browsed through them quickly, and already noticed that ‘Breedlove’ had the same thing happen to an old case called “Hylton v. US”, and that ‘N.Y. Ex Rel. Bryant’ had a couple of pre-1875 cases screwed up, including one named “Bartemeyer.” Both had the case name and pre-1875 citation disappear, and both were replaced with a hyperlinked post-1875 citation.
In fact, the ‘N.Y. Ex Rel. Bryant’ decision ought to be a great test case. In looking at the current Justia site, Footnotes 1-6 have a bunch of pre-1875 cases mixed in among a lot of post-1875 cases. I don’t know what those cases are about, but if my hypothesis is right, we ought to see some funny stuff happening with those pre-1875 cases, but not so much the others. So where are your full screengrabs for the decisions? Or did you just print-to-PDF for everything?
check out Leo's blog and look for this one of the 25 cases:
Kepner v. U.S., 195 U.S. 100 (1904)
In his 2006 snapshot, the following non Minor/Slaughterhouse pre-1875 case (Ex parte Lange, 18 Wall. 163) shows NON ALTERED, it reads...
“In this court, it was said by Mr. Justice Miller, in Ex parte Lange, 18 Wall. 163:”
Both live and old snapshots are identical. There were no changes here. They are the same type of references (pre-1875) that would require the same treatment by the Regex code. But in this case, it did not happen. I had my doubts when you brought up your hypothesis, but what I just showed above further strengthens the argument that the alteration was deliberate in nature.