shameful

[saffronhare]

Found through chernobylred, but spreading from and to all over the place:

Sarah Palin managed to get Roe v. Wade, but was stumped when asked to name any other Supreme Court decisions. In the spirit of remembering that there is more to law than that one case, I am participating in this meme.

The Rules: Post info about ONE Supreme Court decision, modern or historic to your Journal. Any decision, as long as it's not Roe v. Wade. For those who see this on my f-list, you are more than welcome to take the meme to your own Journal to spread the fun.

Here's the shameful part: I don't think I can hold up my end of this bargain in an intelligent fashion. I used to be able to, and it's upsetting to realize how much I've forgotten. Criminy. So my homework for this is to do my homework. In the words of Sarah Palin, "I'll get back to you on that." Ha. (Gonna cry now.)

ETA: Got One. Engel v. Vitale.
This was the first in a series of decisions, contested and making news even today, that declared official prayer in public schools to be unconstitutional. SRSLY. The points raised in both the majority opinion and the dissent keep being replayed. Linky: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engel_v._Vitale

Comments

[triadruid.livejournal.com]

You're also not running for Vice-President of the United States, honey (and, she was asked to name one she disagreed with).

[lightonthesill.livejournal.com]

*choke, cough*.... I stared at your post and panicked for a minute...finally came up w/ Brown vs. ...Brown vs.... Brown vs. Topeka...no... Brown vs. Board of Education (*headdesk*) WOW. And then I couldn't remember much of anything about that flipin LANDMARK case.

Wonder what else I've forgotten.

...ugh.

[saffronhare.livejournal.com]

I know, right? Excellent meme. Very thought-provoking in all kinds of ways.

[clevermanka.livejournal.com]

Yay for getting people to think!

I've long held the opinion that it's not the Executive office who affects our daily lives so much as the Supreme Court. But we've had way too many recent justices nominated by excruciatingly conservative presidents. People need to realize just how much influence the Judiciary branch has on our lives--and put someone in power who can more moderately balance the court.

Hell, they decided the 2000 election. You'd think that alone would have gotten somebody's attention...

[saffronhare.livejournal.com]

Yup. The trouble with an activist court, in contrast to a status-quo court, is that you never know which direction they're going to lean with those tendencies -- either way can be useful or detrimental, depending on the issues that are at hand.

Some of those justices are gettin' on in years; the next two Presidential terms could be pretty influential.

[saffronhare.livejournal.com]

Good thing, huh? I mean, really. Behaving decently during a televised debate would be No Fun. At. All.