"In vacant or in pensive mood..." I am: Bekah; 24; Law Student / Favorite Things: Carbs (so there!), Johnny Damon, Smiling at babies, Grilled cheese, Comfortable silence / Favorite Supreme Court Justice: Brennan / Favorite Wilson: Owen by an inch / Today's Special: Song: Elliott Smith, "Bled White"; Quote: "You know, there's like a butt-load of gangs at this school. This one gang kept wanting me to join because I'm pretty good with a bowstaff." Please love me: mmbekah@yahoo.com


February 2003 March 2003 April 2003 May 2003 June 2003 July 2003 August 2003 September 2003 October 2003 November 2003 December 2003 January 2004 February 2004 March 2004 April 2004 May 2004 June 2004 July 2004 August 2004 September 2004 October 2004 November 2004 December 2004 January 2005 September 2005

 
May It Please the Court?

As you might imagine, trudging through case after case of reading in law school can get a little monotonous. Luckily, every once in a while the wayward law student will come across a case that manages to lighten things up a little. In the course of my studies, I’ve noticed two general types of case law humor, both of which are pretty damn hilarious compared to the usual crap I have to read. Keep in mind, of course, that it’s all relative.

The first type of case law humor occurs when the Judge consciously tries to be funny by coming up with some sort of “hip and happening” pun. (Kind of like when you’re walking in the zoo and your Dad says, “Look at the owls Bekah! Those are the holiest birds around. They’re birds of Pray.”) Judges, like Dads, love a good corny play on words, and they’re not afraid to show off their skills at the expense of the decorum of the court. For example, in his searing dissent in a high profile case about baitfish, Justice Stevens quips, “There is something fishy about this case.” Oh Justice Stevens, you old stinker! You absolutely slay me! That was a good one. But Justice Blackmun really takes it up a notch in the old favorite, Lester Baldwin v. Fish and Game Commission of Montana. Blackmun whips out our dear friend sarcasm and lets her rip: “Equality in access to Montana elk is not basic to the maintenance or well-being of the Union.” Thank you, Justice Blackman. Could you be any more condescending to recreational elk hunters? And really, I don’t think it’s such a good idea to piss those people off.

The other kind of humor occurs when the Judge isn’t even trying to be funny. It comes up when the case is kind of recent, and the Judge is speaking about some “newfangled” thing with which we are now all too familiar. For example, in a Criminal Law case I read last semester from the early 90’s, the Judge was very particular about describing a strange new thing called the INTERNET (yes, it was in all CAPS) which allows companies and universities to COMMUNICATE through a complex network of SUPERCOMPUTERS. A 1972 case I just read for Con Law was equally amusing. In it, the honorable Justice Powell writes, “The Center embodies a relatively new concept in shopping center design. The stores are all located within a single large, multi-level building complex sometimes referred to as the ‘Mall.’” Doesn’t reading that kind of feel like the scene in Back to the Future when the saleslady explains to Marty what a Dustbuster is? Yeah, it’s stuff like this that gets me through the day. I seriously need to get out more.

posted by Bekah at 7:35 AM :: |