Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2023 July 18

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

July 18

Credit card company questions.

1. I was recently the result of skimming in a state of Illinois food stamps card, so, and was worried about credit cards being skimmed. I'm with 3 credit card companies, and none allow the possibility to set a max of single-charge. So therefore, the maximum charge per swipe is the monthly limit. Some of my ccs have a monthly limit as high as $7000/month. Are all credit card companies like this? And is the reason they don't allow users to set a maximum swipe is because of arrogance or they never thought about it? Now, you can lower the monthly limit, but if you do that, the that hurts your credit score, especially if your credit utilization ratio falls below 30%, making this like a catch-22. Shaking-my-head.

2. When credit card companies are part of a bank, can they see how much is in your accounts? I'm with Chase bank and Chase credit card, Capital 1 bank and Capital 1 credit card. Obviously when you're on the phone about your debit card, and want to talk about your credit card, they switch to different phone numbers, making me think the credit card companies are essentially function like completely different companies. But when you 1st open the cc, are they not given how much are in your savings/checkings? Thanks. 170.76.231.162 (talk) 17:06, 18 July 2023 (UTC).

Auto industry question: fixing cars.

When you have like a broken flashlight because the battery is broken, you don't "fix" the battery, you replace it. So what is like this for car parts, which parts are to be fixed, and which are to be replaced? From car mechanics. I'll throw in some examples: engine, alternator, tranmission, torque converter, mufflers, etc. 170.76.231.162 (talk) 17:09, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I don't think the Catalytic Converter is too fixable. You can adjust the pipe connections, maybe run liquid through it to try to clean it, but if that doesn't work, there's not too much an auto mechanic can do... AnonMoos (talk) 18:05, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your perspective) they don't make cars like they used to. I can remember when a VW (Bosch) generator, starter or distributor could be taken apart and fixed by the consumer. And the engine could be easily rebuilt with a $100 rebuild kit in one weekend. There is, however, a current "Right to repair" movement, even a proposed "national automotive right-to-repair commitment" and a proposed "Right to repair act". -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.54.99.98 (talk) 21:37, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

In olden times, cars like the Ford Model T came with instruction books on how to maintain and repair them, so you could do your own work. Or sometimes had to, as in this song from 1914.[1] <-Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots-> 21:48, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

There's a guy in my area who has an entire business built around 3D fabricating parts for Teslas. He has zero employees because the machines do everything. Viriditas (talk) 23:15, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Most reversed U.S. Sup Ct decision by itself?

Has anything been reversed twice yet? Since 1940s, I'm guessing not. President FDR held the longest term and appointed a bunch of Democratic judges to the bench, and only in recent decades has it been 5-4 and recently 6-3 with conservative majority, and in recent weeks have reversed a few decisions. So I'm guessing nothing has been reversed twice so far, unless we go back to the 1800s? 170.76.231.162 (talk) 17:12, 18 July 2023 (UTC).

Supposedly Dred Scott is "the most-reversed decision in Supreme Court history" (a paraphrase of a sentence I once read), but I don't know the details... AnonMoos (talk) 18:01, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Anyway, we have List of overruled United States Supreme Court decisions... AnonMoos (talk) 18:08, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Dred Scott is not listed there, probably because it wasn't overturned by the SC itself but by constitutional amendments (13th/14th). Roentgenium111 (talk) 13:04, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, Dred Scott was never reversed by the Sup Ct, only by a new amendment. What I hear is, Dred Scott is the considered to be the worst Sup Ct decision in history. I suppose if Dobbs is reversed some day by a Democratic majority, we will find out if it is the 1st time reversed twice in nation's history. 170.76.231.162 (talk) 16:04, 20 July 2023 (UTC).

Found the quote in Slavery, Law, and Politics: The Dred Scott Case in Historical Perspective by Don E. Fehrenbacher (1980, p. 298): "Dred Scott v. Sanford has been called `the most frequently overturned decision in history'." There's no source given for the embedded quote; you would have to look at Fehrenbacher's unabridged book The Dred Scott Case: Its Significance in American Law and Politics (1978), which I don't have, for that. Here "overturned" refers both to subsequent constitutional amendments and subsequent court decisions... AnonMoos (talk) 02:06, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

The unabridged work is available on archive.org. The quotation appears on page 580. Fehrenbacher ascribes the quote to "Derrick A. Bell, Jr., ed., Race, Racism, and American Law (Boston, 1973), 21". That edition is not available on Archive.org. The quotation as it stands does not appear in the Second Edition, which was, however, totally re-written. DuncanHill (talk) 08:50, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Courtesy link - Dred Scott v. Sandford. DuncanHill (talk) 13:11, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

I think the OP is asking for a decision for which the reversal itself was later reversed, returning to the original ruling. A hypothetical example would be a future SC re-instating the federal right to abortion, overturning Dobbs which overturned Roe. Roentgenium111 (talk) 12:59, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Which is not impossible, given that (unless I'm confusing it with another case) Dobbs explicitly relies on an argument expressly forbidden by the Ninth Amendment. —Tamfang (talk) 14:22, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Courtesy links - Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization and Roe v. Wade. DuncanHill (talk) 21:13, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

There's maybe some wishful thinking towards a more expansive originalist reading of the 9th and maybe combined with Clarence Thomas' desire to revisit Slaughterhouse and re-invigorate Privileges or Immunities Clause to some kind of libertarian view of Unenumerated Rights, or to start down that path? There are the could-have-beens or might-bes with a different court composition, maybe a Charles Black 9th amendment? It's probably a very long way to striking down Dobbs based on current standing of the 9th. fiveby(zero) 16:44, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

References

Is Shakespeare or Dickens often referenced in law school or MBA school?

I been watching the TV series Suits (2011) about 2 lawyers, and they constantly reference quotes from plays and such. Is novelists like Shakespeare or Dickens constantly referenced in the curriculum? Or other authors? 170.76.231.162 (talk) 17:17, 18 July 2023 (UTC).

Well, a Shakespeare character said "Let's kill all the lawyers", while a Dickens character said "The law is a ass"... -- AnonMoos (talk) 17:59, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

"Often" and "constantly" are too subjective to answer, and doubt anyone tracks stats on that. But "at all", yes, of course two of the most-quoted writers in the Western canon, who did write about legal situations, have been mentioned to students in law school. For example: the search "charles dickens" site:hls.harvard.edu returns only three ghits but "shakespeare" site:hls.harvard.edu returns 46, one of which is an obituary of prof Alan Stone, and mentions One of his most popular courses, “Justice and Morality in the Plays of Shakespeare,” included a staged trial of Hamlet, sometimes with U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy ’61 presiding.. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 20:45, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Not exactly what you are asking for, but the late William Nicholas Knight wrote extensively on Shakespeare and law (and presented some pretty interesting evidence on Shakespeare's connections with the Inns of Court, though he likely extrapolated beyond what his evidence proves). - Jmabel | Talk 00:15, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Treaty of Federation

Treaty of Federation says that the treaty was signed by 86 of Russia's 89 federal subjects. Which ones didn't sign? A cited statement observes that Chechnya and Tatarstan stayed away, but the other one isn't discussed. ru:Федеративный договор gives a list of signatories, but as far as I can tell, it's completely unsourced, so I can't simply go down the list and find the one that's missing. Nyttend (talk) 21:48, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm currently on a network where wayback machine is blocked, but this I think is the treaty itself. At least, that's what I think it is, using the English Google translation of the Russian Wikipedia page. All of the current links to the text of the treaty are coming up deadlinks for me right now. --Jayron32 12:15, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

This works for me: https://fd.rsfsr-rf.ru/ --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 02:18, 21 July 2023 (UTC)