Let's play a game. Recently, Sarah Palin was not able to name one other Supreme Court decision besides Roe v. Wade. Now, I agree Roe is very important, but come one, one more decision? And the best part, she was a party in a recent case and could not even name that one.
So, we are going to play a game, with prizes. Leave a Supreme Court case in the comments. The most obscure one wins a Starbucks gift card. Leave me a valid email please.
I'll start, Marbury v. Madison.
And for more Palin goodness, go here. I mean, I know I'm a liberal and all, but seriously, this stopped being funny a long time ago and has moved into the theater of the absurd.
Are You Smarter Than Sarah Palin?
Previous post: I Know That These Are Hard Economocial Times
Next post: I’m Back With a Vengeance!
{ 116 comments… read them below or add one }
http://jsbowden.livejournal.com/222835.html
http://jsbowden.livejournal.com/222835.html
http://jsbowden.livejournal.com/222835.html
http://jsbowden.livejournal.com/222835.html
Brown vs. Board of Education – although I’m not sure I could come up with a third.
Brown vs. Board of Education – although I’m not sure I could come up with a third.
Brown vs. Board of Education – although I’m not sure I could come up with a third.
Brown vs. Board of Education – although I’m not sure I could come up with a third.
So, I admit that I had to look up the fine details of this one, but I remembered that the Supreme Court ruled on a case that protected gay people’s rights to engage in whatever sexual behavior they wanted to in their own homes a while back (it was in 2003)– overturning a Texas sodomy law (making sodomy a criminal behavior), and reversing their own 1986 ruling. After a quick google, I found it was this– http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F07EED91E3BF934A15755C0A9659C8B63
And, man oh man, did SP give a clear answer to ANYTHING last night? Or did she just throw out a record number of small-town-colloquialisms?? Ugh.
So, I admit that I had to look up the fine details of this one, but I remembered that the Supreme Court ruled on a case that protected gay people’s rights to engage in whatever sexual behavior they wanted to in their own homes a while back (it was in 2003)– overturning a Texas sodomy law (making sodomy a criminal behavior), and reversing their own 1986 ruling. After a quick google, I found it was this– http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F07EED91E3BF934A15755C0A9659C8B63
And, man oh man, did SP give a clear answer to ANYTHING last night? Or did she just throw out a record number of small-town-colloquialisms?? Ugh.
So, I admit that I had to look up the fine details of this one, but I remembered that the Supreme Court ruled on a case that protected gay people’s rights to engage in whatever sexual behavior they wanted to in their own homes a while back (it was in 2003)– overturning a Texas sodomy law (making sodomy a criminal behavior), and reversing their own 1986 ruling. After a quick google, I found it was this– http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F07EED91E3BF934A15755C0A9659C8B63
And, man oh man, did SP give a clear answer to ANYTHING last night? Or did she just throw out a record number of small-town-colloquialisms?? Ugh.
So, I admit that I had to look up the fine details of this one, but I remembered that the Supreme Court ruled on a case that protected gay people’s rights to engage in whatever sexual behavior they wanted to in their own homes a while back (it was in 2003)– overturning a Texas sodomy law (making sodomy a criminal behavior), and reversing their own 1986 ruling. After a quick google, I found it was this– http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F07EED91E3BF934A15755C0A9659C8B63
And, man oh man, did SP give a clear answer to ANYTHING last night? Or did she just throw out a record number of small-town-colloquialisms?? Ugh.
Well the first that jumped to mind was Brown vs. Board of Education, but since beth fish got that one I’ll pick Feist Publications vs Rural Telephone.
Ok, so my job is copyright, so this one I know from that. But it’s really pretty interesting. Really!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural
In a nutshell, Rural had phone book they made for their phone customers. Feist wanted to make a new one. Rural said, no you can’t use our phone book to gather the numbers of people. Feist was all ‘well whatever, we’re using it anyway.’
Rural sued for copyright infringement. They knew Feist took their info cause they’d put in false entries, mwahahaha!
And guess what? Rural LOST. Yep, Feist was ruled to NOT have infringed the copyright on the basis that you can’t copyright facts, and even though a phonebook is an organization of facts, the organization of putting things in alphabetical order isn’t creative enough to have copyright protection.
Voila! Interesting right?
Oh god. I am a geek.
Well the first that jumped to mind was Brown vs. Board of Education, but since beth fish got that one I’ll pick Feist Publications vs Rural Telephone.
Ok, so my job is copyright, so this one I know from that. But it’s really pretty interesting. Really!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural
In a nutshell, Rural had phone book they made for their phone customers. Feist wanted to make a new one. Rural said, no you can’t use our phone book to gather the numbers of people. Feist was all ‘well whatever, we’re using it anyway.’
Rural sued for copyright infringement. They knew Feist took their info cause they’d put in false entries, mwahahaha!
And guess what? Rural LOST. Yep, Feist was ruled to NOT have infringed the copyright on the basis that you can’t copyright facts, and even though a phonebook is an organization of facts, the organization of putting things in alphabetical order isn’t creative enough to have copyright protection.
Voila! Interesting right?
Oh god. I am a geek.
Well the first that jumped to mind was Brown vs. Board of Education, but since beth fish got that one I’ll pick Feist Publications vs Rural Telephone.
Ok, so my job is copyright, so this one I know from that. But it’s really pretty interesting. Really!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural
In a nutshell, Rural had phone book they made for their phone customers. Feist wanted to make a new one. Rural said, no you can’t use our phone book to gather the numbers of people. Feist was all ‘well whatever, we’re using it anyway.’
Rural sued for copyright infringement. They knew Feist took their info cause they’d put in false entries, mwahahaha!
And guess what? Rural LOST. Yep, Feist was ruled to NOT have infringed the copyright on the basis that you can’t copyright facts, and even though a phonebook is an organization of facts, the organization of putting things in alphabetical order isn’t creative enough to have copyright protection.
Voila! Interesting right?
Oh god. I am a geek.
Well the first that jumped to mind was Brown vs. Board of Education, but since beth fish got that one I’ll pick Feist Publications vs Rural Telephone.
Ok, so my job is copyright, so this one I know from that. But it’s really pretty interesting. Really!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural
In a nutshell, Rural had phone book they made for their phone customers. Feist wanted to make a new one. Rural said, no you can’t use our phone book to gather the numbers of people. Feist was all ‘well whatever, we’re using it anyway.’
Rural sued for copyright infringement. They knew Feist took their info cause they’d put in false entries, mwahahaha!
And guess what? Rural LOST. Yep, Feist was ruled to NOT have infringed the copyright on the basis that you can’t copyright facts, and even though a phonebook is an organization of facts, the organization of putting things in alphabetical order isn’t creative enough to have copyright protection.
Voila! Interesting right?
Oh god. I am a geek.
Dred Scott.
Dred Scott.
Dred Scott.
Dred Scott.
Oh and one of my favorites: Tinker v. DesMoines
Oh and one of my favorites: Tinker v. DesMoines
Oh and one of my favorites: Tinker v. DesMoines
Oh and one of my favorites: Tinker v. DesMoines
Actually, wasn’t she asked whether she could name any she disagreed with other than Roe v. Wade? Maybe she likes ‘em all!
Then again, the Court came down against her side in the one she was recently involved in, so you’d think she’d disagree with that one.
Hmmm… obscure Supreme Court case? I think Angela already won that one with the copyright case she mentioned. But the most obscure one I can think of without looking up the name is Lochner v. New York.
Actually, wasn’t she asked whether she could name any she disagreed with other than Roe v. Wade? Maybe she likes ‘em all!
Then again, the Court came down against her side in the one she was recently involved in, so you’d think she’d disagree with that one.
Hmmm… obscure Supreme Court case? I think Angela already won that one with the copyright case she mentioned. But the most obscure one I can think of without looking up the name is Lochner v. New York.
Actually, wasn’t she asked whether she could name any she disagreed with other than Roe v. Wade? Maybe she likes ‘em all!
Then again, the Court came down against her side in the one she was recently involved in, so you’d think she’d disagree with that one.
Hmmm… obscure Supreme Court case? I think Angela already won that one with the copyright case she mentioned. But the most obscure one I can think of without looking up the name is Lochner v. New York.
Actually, wasn’t she asked whether she could name any she disagreed with other than Roe v. Wade? Maybe she likes ‘em all!
Then again, the Court came down against her side in the one she was recently involved in, so you’d think she’d disagree with that one.
Hmmm… obscure Supreme Court case? I think Angela already won that one with the copyright case she mentioned. But the most obscure one I can think of without looking up the name is Lochner v. New York.
Printz vs. US
Printz vs. US
Printz vs. US
Printz vs. US
District of Columbia vs. Heller.
District of Columbia vs. Heller.
District of Columbia vs. Heller.
District of Columbia vs. Heller.
I’m thinking all you lawyers have an unfair advantage, but I’ll throw one out.
Exxon v. Baker
Not that Palin should have been able to refer to that one or anything.
I’m thinking all you lawyers have an unfair advantage, but I’ll throw one out.
Exxon v. Baker
Not that Palin should have been able to refer to that one or anything.
I’m thinking all you lawyers have an unfair advantage, but I’ll throw one out.
Exxon v. Baker
Not that Palin should have been able to refer to that one or anything.
I’m thinking all you lawyers have an unfair advantage, but I’ll throw one out.
Exxon v. Baker
Not that Palin should have been able to refer to that one or anything.
Lucas vs. South Carolina Coastal Council. One of my faves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucas_v._South_Carolina_Coastal_Council
Patriot Act made it to the Supreme Court didn’t it?
Lucas vs. South Carolina Coastal Council. One of my faves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucas_v._South_Carolina_Coastal_Council
Patriot Act made it to the Supreme Court didn’t it?
Lucas vs. South Carolina Coastal Council. One of my faves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucas_v._South_Carolina_Coastal_Council
Patriot Act made it to the Supreme Court didn’t it?
Lucas vs. South Carolina Coastal Council. One of my faves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucas_v._South_Carolina_Coastal_Council
Patriot Act made it to the Supreme Court didn’t it?
I always liked Plessy v. Ferguson. In that Sarah Palin could have used is as an example of one to OVERTURN. It’s the “separate but equal” case saying that segregation was constitutional. Not very obscure, but definitely one she should have known.
I always liked Plessy v. Ferguson. In that Sarah Palin could have used is as an example of one to OVERTURN. It’s the “separate but equal” case saying that segregation was constitutional. Not very obscure, but definitely one she should have known.
I always liked Plessy v. Ferguson. In that Sarah Palin could have used is as an example of one to OVERTURN. It’s the “separate but equal” case saying that segregation was constitutional. Not very obscure, but definitely one she should have known.
I always liked Plessy v. Ferguson. In that Sarah Palin could have used is as an example of one to OVERTURN. It’s the “separate but equal” case saying that segregation was constitutional. Not very obscure, but definitely one she should have known.
Aren’t we all smarter than Sarah Palin?
Eldred v. Ashcroft – a copyright case.
Aren’t we all smarter than Sarah Palin?
Eldred v. Ashcroft – a copyright case.
Aren’t we all smarter than Sarah Palin?
Eldred v. Ashcroft – a copyright case.
Aren’t we all smarter than Sarah Palin?
Eldred v. Ashcroft – a copyright case.
Loving v. Virginia – Ruled that a state ban on interracial marriage is unconstitutional, and now the model for some arguments for the legality of gay marriage.
Loving v. Virginia – Ruled that a state ban on interracial marriage is unconstitutional, and now the model for some arguments for the legality of gay marriage.
Loving v. Virginia – Ruled that a state ban on interracial marriage is unconstitutional, and now the model for some arguments for the legality of gay marriage.
Loving v. Virginia – Ruled that a state ban on interracial marriage is unconstitutional, and now the model for some arguments for the legality of gay marriage.
Wasn’t the question asked of her to name a Supreme Court decision that she disagreed with?
Wasn’t the question asked of her to name a Supreme Court decision that she disagreed with?
Wasn’t the question asked of her to name a Supreme Court decision that she disagreed with?
Wasn’t the question asked of her to name a Supreme Court decision that she disagreed with?
Miranda vs. Arizona.
Miranda vs. Arizona.
Miranda vs. Arizona.
Miranda vs. Arizona.
not obscure but i’m in a weird state of mind…
the people vs larry flynt
heeheeheehee
not obscure but i’m in a weird state of mind…
the people vs larry flynt
heeheeheehee
not obscure but i’m in a weird state of mind…
the people vs larry flynt
heeheeheehee
not obscure but i’m in a weird state of mind…
the people vs larry flynt
heeheeheehee
BaltimoreGal, you totally stole mine. When my husband asked me, “Quick – name three supreme court decisions,” in an attempt to show that I AM smarter than SP, my three were Brown V Board, Roe V Wade and Plessy V Ferguson. As a back up, I had Bakke vs State of California, but I might have that name a little bit wrong.
I believe the question actually WAS “name a SC decision you disagree with.” Yes, maybe she’s just in love with the SC and agrees with everything. But, hello? Didn’t we all learn in our first round of job interview that, when you are asked a question you can’t answer, you need to turn it around to something you know? If you can’t name three decisions you DISagree with, name something you agree with! UGH. Sad to think that someone who, basically, is interviewing for the second most important job in the country missed the only interview technique I remember from almost 20 years ago.
BaltimoreGal, you totally stole mine. When my husband asked me, “Quick – name three supreme court decisions,” in an attempt to show that I AM smarter than SP, my three were Brown V Board, Roe V Wade and Plessy V Ferguson. As a back up, I had Bakke vs State of California, but I might have that name a little bit wrong.
I believe the question actually WAS “name a SC decision you disagree with.” Yes, maybe she’s just in love with the SC and agrees with everything. But, hello? Didn’t we all learn in our first round of job interview that, when you are asked a question you can’t answer, you need to turn it around to something you know? If you can’t name three decisions you DISagree with, name something you agree with! UGH. Sad to think that someone who, basically, is interviewing for the second most important job in the country missed the only interview technique I remember from almost 20 years ago.
BaltimoreGal, you totally stole mine. When my husband asked me, “Quick – name three supreme court decisions,” in an attempt to show that I AM smarter than SP, my three were Brown V Board, Roe V Wade and Plessy V Ferguson. As a back up, I had Bakke vs State of California, but I might have that name a little bit wrong.
I believe the question actually WAS “name a SC decision you disagree with.” Yes, maybe she’s just in love with the SC and agrees with everything. But, hello? Didn’t we all learn in our first round of job interview that, when you are asked a question you can’t answer, you need to turn it around to something you know? If you can’t name three decisions you DISagree with, name something you agree with! UGH. Sad to think that someone who, basically, is interviewing for the second most important job in the country missed the only interview technique I remember from almost 20 years ago.
BaltimoreGal, you totally stole mine. When my husband asked me, “Quick – name three supreme court decisions,” in an attempt to show that I AM smarter than SP, my three were Brown V Board, Roe V Wade and Plessy V Ferguson. As a back up, I had Bakke vs State of California, but I might have that name a little bit wrong.
I believe the question actually WAS “name a SC decision you disagree with.” Yes, maybe she’s just in love with the SC and agrees with everything. But, hello? Didn’t we all learn in our first round of job interview that, when you are asked a question you can’t answer, you need to turn it around to something you know? If you can’t name three decisions you DISagree with, name something you agree with! UGH. Sad to think that someone who, basically, is interviewing for the second most important job in the country missed the only interview technique I remember from almost 20 years ago.
Goldberg v. Kelly
She should have been able to name this one.
“Goldberg v. Kelly held that welfare recipients are constitutionally entitled to a hearing before their benefits can be terminated. The ruling transformed the administration of government benefits programs across the country and gave the concept of constitutional due process a broader interpretation than it had ever received” (NYT)
Goldberg v. Kelly
She should have been able to name this one.
“Goldberg v. Kelly held that welfare recipients are constitutionally entitled to a hearing before their benefits can be terminated. The ruling transformed the administration of government benefits programs across the country and gave the concept of constitutional due process a broader interpretation than it had ever received” (NYT)
Goldberg v. Kelly
She should have been able to name this one.
“Goldberg v. Kelly held that welfare recipients are constitutionally entitled to a hearing before their benefits can be terminated. The ruling transformed the administration of government benefits programs across the country and gave the concept of constitutional due process a broader interpretation than it had ever received” (NYT)
Goldberg v. Kelly
She should have been able to name this one.
“Goldberg v. Kelly held that welfare recipients are constitutionally entitled to a hearing before their benefits can be terminated. The ruling transformed the administration of government benefits programs across the country and gave the concept of constitutional due process a broader interpretation than it had ever received” (NYT)
Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah, 1993. The Court ruled against a city ordinance in Florida that forbade animal sacrifice in religious ceremonies.
I wrote a paper on the case in The Supreme Court and Civil Liberties class as an undergrad.
And, PLEASE note that I do not practice animal sacrifice!
Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah, 1993. The Court ruled against a city ordinance in Florida that forbade animal sacrifice in religious ceremonies.
I wrote a paper on the case in The Supreme Court and Civil Liberties class as an undergrad.
And, PLEASE note that I do not practice animal sacrifice!
Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah, 1993. The Court ruled against a city ordinance in Florida that forbade animal sacrifice in religious ceremonies.
I wrote a paper on the case in The Supreme Court and Civil Liberties class as an undergrad.
And, PLEASE note that I do not practice animal sacrifice!
Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah, 1993. The Court ruled against a city ordinance in Florida that forbade animal sacrifice in religious ceremonies.
I wrote a paper on the case in The Supreme Court and Civil Liberties class as an undergrad.
And, PLEASE note that I do not practice animal sacrifice!
I’m afraid all the cases I know off the top of my head have been listed already. But she should have been able to come up with at least one…
I’m afraid all the cases I know off the top of my head have been listed already. But she should have been able to come up with at least one…
I’m afraid all the cases I know off the top of my head have been listed already. But she should have been able to come up with at least one…
I’m afraid all the cases I know off the top of my head have been listed already. But she should have been able to come up with at least one…
Gideon v. Wainwright
Gideon v. Wainwright
Gideon v. Wainwright
Gideon v. Wainwright
I can name far more than Sarah Palin! I agree with these decisions, btw:
Lawrence v. Texas: declared sodomy laws unconstitutional
Skinner v. Oklahoma: declared forced sterilization of “habitual criminals” unconstitutional
Eisenstadt v. Baird: information/access to contraception must be available to women regardless of their marital status
I can name far more than Sarah Palin! I agree with these decisions, btw:
Lawrence v. Texas: declared sodomy laws unconstitutional
Skinner v. Oklahoma: declared forced sterilization of “habitual criminals” unconstitutional
Eisenstadt v. Baird: information/access to contraception must be available to women regardless of their marital status
I can name far more than Sarah Palin! I agree with these decisions, btw:
Lawrence v. Texas: declared sodomy laws unconstitutional
Skinner v. Oklahoma: declared forced sterilization of “habitual criminals” unconstitutional
Eisenstadt v. Baird: information/access to contraception must be available to women regardless of their marital status
I can name far more than Sarah Palin! I agree with these decisions, btw:
Lawrence v. Texas: declared sodomy laws unconstitutional
Skinner v. Oklahoma: declared forced sterilization of “habitual criminals” unconstitutional
Eisenstadt v. Baird: information/access to contraception must be available to women regardless of their marital status
Also, there are people who have never been to college, yet can name more Supreme Court decisions than Sarah Palin, based solely on having seen a few episodes of Law and Order.
Wait, don’t they write about those in newspapers and magazines? I mean, she reads ALL of them, right?
Also, there are people who have never been to college, yet can name more Supreme Court decisions than Sarah Palin, based solely on having seen a few episodes of Law and Order.
Wait, don’t they write about those in newspapers and magazines? I mean, she reads ALL of them, right?
Also, there are people who have never been to college, yet can name more Supreme Court decisions than Sarah Palin, based solely on having seen a few episodes of Law and Order.
Wait, don’t they write about those in newspapers and magazines? I mean, she reads ALL of them, right?
Also, there are people who have never been to college, yet can name more Supreme Court decisions than Sarah Palin, based solely on having seen a few episodes of Law and Order.
Wait, don’t they write about those in newspapers and magazines? I mean, she reads ALL of them, right?
The sad thing is, I’d have to Google something. And I took a first ammendment law class in college that had me thinking about law school for a half of second.
Now I can’t think of any.
The sad thing is, I’d have to Google something. And I took a first ammendment law class in college that had me thinking about law school for a half of second.
Now I can’t think of any.
The sad thing is, I’d have to Google something. And I took a first ammendment law class in college that had me thinking about law school for a half of second.
Now I can’t think of any.
The sad thing is, I’d have to Google something. And I took a first ammendment law class in college that had me thinking about law school for a half of second.
Now I can’t think of any.
Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley (1982)
Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley (1982)
Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley (1982)
Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley (1982)
How about United States v. Nixon. Makes me dream of a United States v. G.W. Bush case to take him to task.
How about United States v. Nixon. Makes me dream of a United States v. G.W. Bush case to take him to task.
How about United States v. Nixon. Makes me dream of a United States v. G.W. Bush case to take him to task.
How about United States v. Nixon. Makes me dream of a United States v. G.W. Bush case to take him to task.
How nice that a Washington lawyer, albeit a part time one, can name the first landmark decision from the high court. Although I bet most people wouldn’t disagree with that decision. I vote for Plessy vs. Ferguson, upholding the constitutionality of racial segregation, as a decision I would disagree with.
How nice that a Washington lawyer, albeit a part time one, can name the first landmark decision from the high court. Although I bet most people wouldn’t disagree with that decision. I vote for Plessy vs. Ferguson, upholding the constitutionality of racial segregation, as a decision I would disagree with.
How nice that a Washington lawyer, albeit a part time one, can name the first landmark decision from the high court. Although I bet most people wouldn’t disagree with that decision. I vote for Plessy vs. Ferguson, upholding the constitutionality of racial segregation, as a decision I would disagree with.
How nice that a Washington lawyer, albeit a part time one, can name the first landmark decision from the high court. Although I bet most people wouldn’t disagree with that decision. I vote for Plessy vs. Ferguson, upholding the constitutionality of racial segregation, as a decision I would disagree with.