![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Oct. 1st, 2008 08:35 pmFrom ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
dakiwiboid:
The Rules: Post info about ONE Supreme Court decision, modern or historic to your lj. (Any decision, as long as it's not Roe v. Wade.) For those who see this on your f-list, take the meme to your OWN lj to spread the fun.
rydra_wong adds: (*cough*Thismightbewhy*cough*.)
jonquil adds:
Non-Americans, I would love it if you posted a foundational court case in your system.
Griswold v Connecticut. Married couples cannot be kept from using birth control, on the grounds that governments have no business interfering in private sexual matters. By extension, applies to all forms of consensual sex between adults, whether conception is ordinarily a concern or not.
Loving v Virginia. Individuals of differing race cannot be kept from marrying or penalized for having gotten married, on the grounds that marriage is a basic human right that cannot be denied to certain couples because of circumstances that the individuals in question have no choice about. By extension, applies to all couples regardless of skin color, sex, gender, etc.
Dred Scott v some free state or other. Human beings that have been defined as property remain so defined, despite being or having been in jurisdictions where 'human being' and 'property' are categories that can never overlap.
Plessy v Ferguson. Segregation.
Brown v Board of Education. Desegregation.
Bush v Gore. For which decision all the members of the Court should be walloped upside the head with the thickest book of Florida law that can be found. Supreme Court judges, being nominated by the President, should not be permitted any voice in the selection of the President, or no voice louder than that of any nine randomly selected voters. What the Court should have done was check Florida law on what to do when the vote numbers come up screwy (which in this case is 'recount every vote in the state', I believe), then ask why such had not already been done and tell them to go do it. And yes, I'd say the same if the Court had decided in favor of Gore.
'Kay, bored now. Also, Amazon packed my books wrong, so my new and otherwise shiny copy of The Speed of Dark has bent pages and a creased cover. *sulk*
ETA: and naturallysynecdochic shows me up almost before I say anything.
dakiwiboid:The Rules: Post info about ONE Supreme Court decision, modern or historic to your lj. (Any decision, as long as it's not Roe v. Wade.) For those who see this on your f-list, take the meme to your OWN lj to spread the fun.
rydra_wong adds: (*cough*Thismightbewhy*cough*.)jonquil adds:Non-Americans, I would love it if you posted a foundational court case in your system.
Griswold v Connecticut. Married couples cannot be kept from using birth control, on the grounds that governments have no business interfering in private sexual matters. By extension, applies to all forms of consensual sex between adults, whether conception is ordinarily a concern or not.
Loving v Virginia. Individuals of differing race cannot be kept from marrying or penalized for having gotten married, on the grounds that marriage is a basic human right that cannot be denied to certain couples because of circumstances that the individuals in question have no choice about. By extension, applies to all couples regardless of skin color, sex, gender, etc.
Dred Scott v some free state or other. Human beings that have been defined as property remain so defined, despite being or having been in jurisdictions where 'human being' and 'property' are categories that can never overlap.
Plessy v Ferguson. Segregation.
Brown v Board of Education. Desegregation.
Bush v Gore. For which decision all the members of the Court should be walloped upside the head with the thickest book of Florida law that can be found. Supreme Court judges, being nominated by the President, should not be permitted any voice in the selection of the President, or no voice louder than that of any nine randomly selected voters. What the Court should have done was check Florida law on what to do when the vote numbers come up screwy (which in this case is 'recount every vote in the state', I believe), then ask why such had not already been done and tell them to go do it. And yes, I'd say the same if the Court had decided in favor of Gore.
'Kay, bored now. Also, Amazon packed my books wrong, so my new and otherwise shiny copy of The Speed of Dark has bent pages and a creased cover. *sulk*
ETA: and naturally
synecdochic shows me up almost before I say anything.