Humor: The Discarded Supreme Court Decision Unveiled
The following is a draft of the Supreme Court decision in Bush v. Gore, discovered in a dumpster on Capitol Hill.
Per Curiam
In keeping with the Court's ambition to provide an unambiguous and unanimous decision in Bush v. Gore, and thereby legitimate the outcome of the 2000 presidential election, we present herein a majority opinion signed by Justices Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas, O'Connor and Kennedy, with a partial dissent to the majority by Justices Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas, a full dissent by Justices Stevens, Souter, Breyer, and Ginsburg, a partial dissent to the full dissent by Justices Breyer and Souter, a needling, invective-filled dissent to the partial dissent to the majority opinion from Scalia, a spitwad [attached] from Justice Stevens and a chunk of hair [attached] ripped from the head of Justice O'Connor by Justice Ginsburg during final deliberations.
The Court will note that it did manage on Tuesday afternoon to assemble a respectable 6-3 majority in favor of the Chinese take-out.
This Court acknowledges that, under the Constitution, a presidential election is truly a series of state elections, all procedures of which are presumed governed by state legislators and judges. We hereby void that presumption in states whose configuration can be described as "peninsular." This ruling, though admittedly unusual, is grounded in our belief that Florida is a rogue state whose judicial apparatus is facially null per 3 USC Section 5 Chapter 11 Verse 21 Footnote 8. None of the justices in the majority have actually read that clause recently but we vaguely recall it from law school.
The accounting of an election must submit to the conjoined priorities of accuracy and finality. Obviously this election will achieve neither. No one will ever know the "real" vote, and this will continue to be a subject of fierce argument even as the Sun begins to cool and gradually expand and turn into what astronomers refer to as a Red Giant. We encourage the public to avoid conspiracy theories, and hereby reject the suggestion in the Gore brief that, if you examine the Zapruder film closely, it appears that James A. Baker is the "umbrella man."
Deadlines in elections must be respected. There is clearly not enough time to complete the recount of ballots in Florida, expose that recount to legal challenge and judicial review, and remain faithful to the Dec. 12 "Safe Harbor" provision under which electors cannot be challenged in Congress. In retrospect it might be argued that this Court did not speed up the process by halting the vote count on Saturday: Castigating public officials for taking too long in a process that we have stopped altogether is something this Court finds amusing.
Moreover, this Court is extremely concerned that the Florida election has resulted in violence to the Equal Protection Clause – specifically, the recount is unfair to those voters whose unfair advantage had already been in place before the election. We stipulate that, speaking very generally, affluent citizens in precincts using optical-scanning equipment enjoy a significant advantage over the votes of poor and minority citizens in precincts using antiquated punch-card balloting. On the other hand, the Framers didn't think that blacks and women and poor people should be allowed to vote, period. Let's keep this in perspective.
We confess that it requires a certain intellectual finesse to declare that the real victims in the Florida recount were the Bush voters, but we will remind the public that we have lifetime appointments and cannot be fired. At times, we feel like gods. Chief Justice Rehnquist can report with authority that there is no greater pleasure in life than killing ants in one's kitchen with a Supreme Court gavel.
Inevitably, this ruling will be criticized as "political." Cynics, unfamiliar with the historic independence of the nation's highest court, will point out that the majority is comprised entirely of justices appointed by Republican presidents, and that two of the justices in the majority were explicitly criticized during the campaign by the vice president. This ruling, however, is not the slightest bit political. It's personal.
Several of us on this court are desperate to retire. We don't want some liberal Democrat to appoint our successor. If Bush becomes president, for example, Justice O'Connor can step down and spend the spring playing tennis in Scottsdale. She is reputed to be unforgiving and obstinate in her line calls. Justice Rehnquist will also retire, and Justice Scalia will be appointed the Chief Justice, from which perch he can rain terror upon the sodomites and connivers and mushy-brained liberals who have brought this once-great nation to the edge of ruin.
Let us finally address the defendant directly. Mr. Vice President, we have you surrounded. Come out with your hands up. You will not be harmed. You still have a great future ahead of you. Think of your family.
It is so ordered
The following is a draft of the Supreme Court decision in Bush v. Gore, discovered in a dumpster on Capitol Hill.
Per Curiam
In keeping with the Court's ambition to provide an unambiguous and unanimous decision in Bush v. Gore, and thereby legitimate the outcome of the 2000 presidential election, we present herein a majority opinion signed by Justices Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas, O'Connor and Kennedy, with a partial dissent to the majority by Justices Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas, a full dissent by Justices Stevens, Souter, Breyer, and Ginsburg, a partial dissent to the full dissent by Justices Breyer and Souter, a needling, invective-filled dissent to the partial dissent to the majority opinion from Scalia, a spitwad [attached] from Justice Stevens and a chunk of hair [attached] ripped from the head of Justice O'Connor by Justice Ginsburg during final deliberations.
The Court will note that it did manage on Tuesday afternoon to assemble a respectable 6-3 majority in favor of the Chinese take-out.
This Court acknowledges that, under the Constitution, a presidential election is truly a series of state elections, all procedures of which are presumed governed by state legislators and judges. We hereby void that presumption in states whose configuration can be described as "peninsular." This ruling, though admittedly unusual, is grounded in our belief that Florida is a rogue state whose judicial apparatus is facially null per 3 USC Section 5 Chapter 11 Verse 21 Footnote 8. None of the justices in the majority have actually read that clause recently but we vaguely recall it from law school.
The accounting of an election must submit to the conjoined priorities of accuracy and finality. Obviously this election will achieve neither. No one will ever know the "real" vote, and this will continue to be a subject of fierce argument even as the Sun begins to cool and gradually expand and turn into what astronomers refer to as a Red Giant. We encourage the public to avoid conspiracy theories, and hereby reject the suggestion in the Gore brief that, if you examine the Zapruder film closely, it appears that James A. Baker is the "umbrella man."
Deadlines in elections must be respected. There is clearly not enough time to complete the recount of ballots in Florida, expose that recount to legal challenge and judicial review, and remain faithful to the Dec. 12 "Safe Harbor" provision under which electors cannot be challenged in Congress. In retrospect it might be argued that this Court did not speed up the process by halting the vote count on Saturday: Castigating public officials for taking too long in a process that we have stopped altogether is something this Court finds amusing.
Moreover, this Court is extremely concerned that the Florida election has resulted in violence to the Equal Protection Clause – specifically, the recount is unfair to those voters whose unfair advantage had already been in place before the election. We stipulate that, speaking very generally, affluent citizens in precincts using optical-scanning equipment enjoy a significant advantage over the votes of poor and minority citizens in precincts using antiquated punch-card balloting. On the other hand, the Framers didn't think that blacks and women and poor people should be allowed to vote, period. Let's keep this in perspective.
We confess that it requires a certain intellectual finesse to declare that the real victims in the Florida recount were the Bush voters, but we will remind the public that we have lifetime appointments and cannot be fired. At times, we feel like gods. Chief Justice Rehnquist can report with authority that there is no greater pleasure in life than killing ants in one's kitchen with a Supreme Court gavel.
Inevitably, this ruling will be criticized as "political." Cynics, unfamiliar with the historic independence of the nation's highest court, will point out that the majority is comprised entirely of justices appointed by Republican presidents, and that two of the justices in the majority were explicitly criticized during the campaign by the vice president. This ruling, however, is not the slightest bit political. It's personal.
Several of us on this court are desperate to retire. We don't want some liberal Democrat to appoint our successor. If Bush becomes president, for example, Justice O'Connor can step down and spend the spring playing tennis in Scottsdale. She is reputed to be unforgiving and obstinate in her line calls. Justice Rehnquist will also retire, and Justice Scalia will be appointed the Chief Justice, from which perch he can rain terror upon the sodomites and connivers and mushy-brained liberals who have brought this once-great nation to the edge of ruin.
Let us finally address the defendant directly. Mr. Vice President, we have you surrounded. Come out with your hands up. You will not be harmed. You still have a great future ahead of you. Think of your family.
It is so ordered