"Excoriates" is a new one. Finally break out the thesaurus there, journos?
But also, are you telling me that they aren't already under oath when in the courtroom?
this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2026
68 points (100.0% liked)
News
36618 readers
1716 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Lawyers are most definitely not under oath in the courtroom. They are under scrutiny of the bar association if they get way out of line, but lawyers can pretty much say whatever they want. It's up to the opposing counsel to object and the judge to keep shit from going off the rails.
excoriate /ĭk-skôr′ē-āt″/ transitive verb
- To censure strongly; denounce.
- To criticize (something) harshly.
- To tear, scrape, or wear off (the skin).
Don't think we're lucky enough for it to be #3.
Number 3 is the only definition I knew before this thanks for sharing!
FWIW the skin picking excoriation is actually a psychological disorder, not just idle picking
Federal prosecutors:
U.S. District Court Judge Christine O’Hearn issued an order earlier this month that says statements from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey could only be trusted if given under oath. Quraishi quoted from that order in his Thursday opinion.
“Sadly, the well-deserved credibility once attached to that distinguished Office is now a presumption that ‘has been undeniably eroded,’ he wrote.
I'd be surprised if there wasn't a betting site dedicated to judges actually following through on their threats.
This is intentional. "The government" is testing the limits to which the law will hold them.
"The government’s continued reliance on the statute, violations of dozens of court orders, and its repeated transfers of immigration detainees in violation of those orders had also harmed credibility of the U.S. Attorney’s Office, he said."
EXCORIATES? Wow! THAT will Show them!
If they weren’t SLAMmed then it’s not a real threat.
Buckle up, it feels like we're getting close to writing a strongly worded letter territory here folks.