a facebook friend informed me that mr. marx would have been 118 today.
also, i would like to pick a least favorite supreme court case ever ... i can't remember what it's called, but it's the blue plate case were scalia says racial profiling by the cops is a-okay.
Personally I would cheese out and go with Dred Scott or Plessy v. Ferguson as far as least-favorites go but that's because I'm not a law nerd. Kelo does not thrill me, though.
I am pretty confident that if I were to actually come up with a Top 10 Least Favorite Cases, 8 of the 10 would be able to be summed up as "the one where Scalia says X." I have a serious hate for that man -- he is both evil and rude.
But I have to allow at least a couple of spaces on my list for the 11th Amendment cases, that basically interpret it to mean exactly the opposite of what the text says and what the history of the amendment supports, which reduces me to gibbering incoherence (not solely from the illogicality, but because it leads to some very inequitable results, like the decision that essentially says, yeah, these laws protect you from being screwed over by your employer, unless your employer is a state, in which case you're SOL, because while the Feds can sue them in Federal court, you, personally, can't, and oh by the way, even if suing a state in that state's court weren't an uphill battle, you can't do that either, because the Federal jurisdiction is exclusive, so TOUGH).
Comments 6
It is, as one person put it, the granddaddy of all Supreme Court cases. Without it, none of the rest are possible.
Reply
Reply
also, i would like to pick a least favorite supreme court case ever ... i can't remember what it's called, but it's the blue plate case were scalia says racial profiling by the cops is a-okay.
Reply
Reply
Reply
But I have to allow at least a couple of spaces on my list for the 11th Amendment cases, that basically interpret it to mean exactly the opposite of what the text says and what the history of the amendment supports, which reduces me to gibbering incoherence (not solely from the illogicality, but because it leads to some very inequitable results, like the decision that essentially says, yeah, these laws protect you from being screwed over by your employer, unless your employer is a state, in which case you're SOL, because while the Feds can sue them in Federal court, you, personally, can't, and oh by the way, even if suing a state in that state's court weren't an uphill battle, you can't do that either, because the Federal jurisdiction is exclusive, so TOUGH).
Reply
Leave a comment