Editing 1607: Supreme Court
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
==Explanation== | ==Explanation== | ||
− | + | {{incomplete|Most rudimentary possible explanation, along with transcript. Not sure who the person is, though.}} | |
− | The | + | The {{w|Supreme Court of the United States}} is the highest judiciary body in the United States. Its decisions, along with the opinions of its justices, are often in the news, as in the case here. However, the Supreme Court has only nine members. Thus, a ruling that passed 9-1 (for a total of 10 votes) would indicate that an additional justice sneaked in to the court. The other nine justices know that, and make it clear that this tenth justice does not belong. Or at least he doesn't belong today. While the size of the Supreme Court has been nine justices since 1869, from 1863 to 1866, there were ten justices on the Supreme Court. |
− | + | The identity of this person is not known either to the reader or to the actual justices, and neither is the reason that the interloper's "vote" was counted (presumably, the nine actual justices voted that he didn't belong while he himself voted the other way). | |
− | The title text refers to {{w|Justice Kennedy}}'s reputation for being a moderate who is usually the swing vote in 5-4 decisions, which means that his vote can decide the outcome of the case | + | The title text refers to {{w|Justice Kennedy}}'s reputation for being a moderate who is usually the swing vote in 5-4 decisions, which means that his vote can decide the outcome of the case. The joke in the title text is that he is weighing the arguments of both sides even though the non-justice is clearly not a justice and would not be allowed to make an argument if he were. The fictional Kennedy is committing the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderation Golden Mean Fallacy], also seen in [[690: Semicontrolled Demolition]], and makes the same jab at that fallacy. Sometimes, the views of the two sides are mutually exclusive, or the other side is just wrong. |
− | There is a second joke in the title text, that the man is claiming to be two of the current justices, who would actually have been in the room at the same time as the impostor was claiming to be them. To add further absurdity to this, one of those justices the man | + | There is a second joke in the title text, that the man is claiming to be two of the current justices, who would actually have been in the room at the same time as the impostor was claiming -- apparently convincingly -- to be them. To add further absurdity to this, one of those justices the man was claiming to be was {{w|Justice Ginsburg}}, who is female. |
− | |||
− | |||
==Transcript== | ==Transcript== | ||
− | :[ | + | :[A female newscaster with long blond hair is sitting at her desk with a small image of scales shown to the left.of her] <!-- used to say "her left" which is untrue; to her left is to the observer's right --> |
− | : | + | :Newscaster: Breaking news: The Supreme Court has ruled 9-1 that they don't know who this guy is or how he got in here, but he's definitely ''not'' a justice. |
{{comic discussion}} | {{comic discussion}} | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− |