Sarah and the Supremes

As today is the first Monday in October, it seems like a good time to consider Sarah Palin’s recent Katie Couric interview where she was asked about Supreme Court decisions, specifically, the one’s with which she might disagree

As Palin received a lot of flack for only being able to remember one case, the Roe decision, I tested myself by taking a piece of scrap paper and jotting down any other cases that I could remember.

Involving the rights of persons under arrest, I recalled Miranda v. Ohio [1961 – the Miranda rights that need to be read to certain arrested persons], the Gideon decision [1963 – poor defendants deserve a lawyer], and Mapp v. Ohio [1961 – search warrants and the admissibility of illegally obtained evidence].

From my school days several decades ago I still remembered the Dred Scott decision, which was always on exams [1857 – Dred Scott v. Sandford – black persons are not citizens under the Constitution].

Then there were the related decisions Plessy v. Ferguson [1896 – separate but equal is okay] and Brown V. the Board of Education that overturned Plessy [1954 – separate but equal is not okay].

Regarding education, there was the Bakke case [1978 – UC v. Bakke – affirmative action – some special admissions policies unconstitutional].

Now, these were the ones I immediately remembered, but after reflection others came to mind, even if not completely.

Here’s one that Palin should be aware of, BOE Island Trees School District v. Pico [1982 – regarding book banning, ”…schools may not control their libraries in a manner that results in a narrow partisan view of certain matters of opinion…”]. Then there is Wallace v. Jaffree [1985 – moment of silence not constitutional in Alabama law as it was to endorse religion and return prayer to public schools]. She may want to review Lee v. Weisman [1992 – prayers as part of a school program not allowed].

I won’t go on, but I will suggest she take a Constitutional Law course. She really needs it – even as governor. And some legal studies may help her in that pesky Troopergate investigation.

##
In the interests of full disclosure, I did look up the years of most of the decisions and I was required to take a fair number of law courses in college and worked in the legal field.

Palin Because...

While American's wonder why McCain chose Sarah Palin as his running mate, the answer seems obvious: Comedy writers needed fresh material.

This is how it came about.

With presidential campaigns being so expensive, the comedy writers all pooled their money and came up with the highest bid - uh, I mean contribution - to McCain's election fund. Since they won, they got to pick the vice-presidential candidate.

##
Okay, so do you have a better explanation?

Palin: Because....

When presidential candidate McCain announced that his running mate would be Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, there was a collective ”Who?” heard across 49 of the 50 United States.

Then everyone asked “why?”- including the citizens of Alaska. I’m not even sure McCain could answer the question in depth.

But then I heard one of the night show hosts talking about President Bush’s reaction to Russia’s invasion of Georgia. According to this comedian, upon hearing about the invasion, Bush sent warplanes to Atlanta. [I’m pretty sure the comedian was joking.]

Then it occurred to me why McCain chose Palin: he thought that it would be an election coup if he could develop an alliance with a foreign country with oil reserves.

Right?