Sunday, May 09, 2010


Judicial humor is, and generally must be, very dry, but sometimes judicial opinions are worth reading. I liked this section of Janice Rodger Brown's judicial opinion in the most recent Newdow case, which recently came for appeal before the D.C. Circuit panel:

No amount of discovery will uncover the identities of the unnamed defendants. Therefore, by naming as defendants all persons the future President could possibly invite to administer an oath, lead a prayer, or help in the planning of these events, plaintiffs are essentially seeking a declaration of their rights accompanied by an injunction against the world. There is another name for that type of generally applicable relief: legislation. And that’s not within the power of the courts.

I'll have to remember "declaration of rights accompanied by an injunction against the world"; it summarizes in a straightforward way why I think working for rights through the courts doesn't generally work well.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please understand that this weblog runs on a third-party comment system, not on Blogger's comment system. If you have come by way of a mobile device and can see this message, you may have landed on the Blogger comment page, or the third party commenting system has not yet completely loaded; your comments will only be shown on this page and not on the page most people will see, and it is much more likely that your comment will be missed.