Re: NBD?

1

I'm not surprised. Alito always struck me as the one most likely to be willing to legislate morality from the bench. No libertarian, that guy.


Posted by: mealworm | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 10:58 AM
horizontal rule
2

Also, he's an avocational entomologist.


Posted by: ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 11:04 AM
horizontal rule
3

Did you just call Samuel Alito a bugfucker?


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 11:08 AM
horizontal rule
4

Oh, he's bugfuck crazy, apo.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 11:13 AM
horizontal rule
5

If he didn't, I will.


Posted by: beamish | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 11:15 AM
horizontal rule
6

Did you just call Samuel Alito a bugfucker?

All I meant is that it would be irresponsible not to speculate about the existence of a film of such activities.


Posted by: ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 11:26 AM
horizontal rule
7

I haven't spent any time on the issue, but I found Alito's opinion">http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-769.ZD.html">opinion pretty persuasive. Except where he invokes National Hunting Day and quotes the proclamations. Come on.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 11:28 AM
horizontal rule
8

Is there a subset of furries that dress up as bugs? If so, can they please be called "crunchies"?


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 11:28 AM
horizontal rule
9

Reading that dissent reminds me of two things: that legal writing, even what I have to assume is good-if-not-great legal writing, is pretty yucky (not that the writing coming out of my discipline is any better, mind you); and that it's often hard to discern much about a judge from a single opinion (this point is probably generalizable to the hazards of using limited samples of just about any kind of data).


Posted by: ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 11:37 AM
horizontal rule
10

Crunchies on video.


Posted by: MAE | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 11:39 AM
horizontal rule
11

MAE!


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 11:47 AM
horizontal rule
12

Stanley!


Posted by: MAE | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 11:49 AM
horizontal rule
13

From the dissent: "Virtually all state laws prohibiting animal cruelty either expressly define the term "animal" to exclude wildlife or else specifically exempt lawful hunting activities".

Buh? Why would anyone take the first approach? I can understand wanting to allow people to, say, shoot deer with shotguns, but surely even hunters don't think it should be legal to, say, tie them down and skin them alive. (It would also be consistent to make shooting domestic pets with a shotgun illegal for reasons other than that it is cruel to animals, because really, it's not like the difference between deer and dogs is that the former don't mind getting shot.)


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 11:58 AM
horizontal rule
14

shoot deer with shotguns

My reflexive thought to this was, no, people shoot deer with rifles, right? But then my mind went, no, duh, self, it's called buck shot. But then, isn't it both? And why the difference if so?


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 12:05 PM
horizontal rule
15

Yes, and you use grapeshot to shoot grapes.

However, it seems that a shotgun designed to shoot slugs is an inexpensive way to outfit a new hunter for deer season.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 12:08 PM
horizontal rule
16

A shotgun seems like overkill for slugs. Unless they're really fearsomely enormous slugs.


Posted by: Gabardine Bathyscaphe | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 12:57 PM
horizontal rule
17

I would think that slugs and deer would demand entirely different hunting techniques.


Posted by: Tom Scudder | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 12:57 PM
horizontal rule
18

Pwn'd, but at least my pwn'd post seems plausibly like a continuation of the conversation.


Posted by: Tom Scudder | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 12:58 PM
horizontal rule
19

Actually, I've heard tell of crotchedy property owners who shoot trespassers with shotguns packed with rock salt, which purportedly stings but generally not in a fatal way. While probably still overkill for your average slug, I could see that being an effective slug-murdering technique.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 1:01 PM
horizontal rule
20

um, "crotchety"


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 1:01 PM
horizontal rule
21

Anything worth killing is worth overkilling.


Posted by: MAE | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 1:02 PM
horizontal rule
22

11 gets it exactly right.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 1:05 PM
horizontal rule
23

Spring is in the air, flowers are blooming, and a young man's thoughts inevitably turn to discussions about Samuel Alito and bugfucking. So here I am.


Posted by: MAE | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 1:14 PM
horizontal rule
24

Unless they're really fearsomely enormous slugs.

We have those out here, but only a good shot with a powerful gun should ever try to shoot one. They're a lot more dangerous if you just injure them and make them angry.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 1:18 PM
horizontal rule
25

They charge when wounded.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 1:22 PM
horizontal rule
26

I think this opinion issued this morning lets you learn plenty about the judge.

During law school, I interned for a judge, and wrote a draft opinion in a case about whether rats, mice, and birds were "animals" within the meaning of the lab animal protection statute. As I recall, the judge ruled against the government's Chevron argument, and that doesn't happen much. Reversed on other grounds on appeal.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 1:28 PM
horizontal rule
27

26 -- Reversed for lack of standing.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 1:32 PM
horizontal rule
28

I don't remember who MAE is. Boo, but oh well.


Posted by: parsimon | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 1:49 PM
horizontal rule
29

My Alter Ego.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 1:51 PM
horizontal rule
30

29: No apo, he's MY Alter Ego.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 1:53 PM
horizontal rule
31

HE'S MY ALTER EGO!


Posted by: OPINIONATED SPARTACUS | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 1:54 PM
horizontal rule
32

Where's a Giant Mutant Cockroach when you need one?


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 1:56 PM
horizontal rule
33

Where's a Giant Mutant Cockroach when you need one?

Lately he's been spending the night at Alito's place, and some days he doesn't come home at all.


Posted by: MAE | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 1:59 PM
horizontal rule
34

32: I dunno. Ask Alito, he's the bug specialist.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 1:59 PM
horizontal rule
35

MAE is banned!


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:00 PM
horizontal rule
36

Where's a Giant Mutant Cockroach when you need one?

HE'S MY ALTER EGO!


Posted by: OPINIONATED GREGOR SAMSA | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:02 PM
horizontal rule
37

NO, THAT'S A DUNG BEETLE, YOU ILLITERATE.


Posted by: OPINIONATED NABOKOV | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:05 PM
horizontal rule
38

NABOKOV GETS IT EXACTLY RIGHT.


Posted by: OPINIONATED FRANZ KAFKA | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:08 PM
horizontal rule
39

Quick! Somebody get an apple! I know just what to do!


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:08 PM
horizontal rule
40

37: I CAN'T READ YOU! LA LA LA!


Posted by: OPINIONATED ILLITERATE | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:08 PM
horizontal rule
41

39: What kind? A MacBook? An iPod? An iPad?


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:09 PM
horizontal rule
42

Okay, 40 was really funny.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:15 PM
horizontal rule
43

HOW COME NOBODY EVER TELLS ME HOW FUNNY I AM?


Posted by: OPINIONATED ILLITERATE | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:22 PM
horizontal rule
44

They charge when wounded.

Just like lawyers.

Tip your servers.


Posted by: ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:23 PM
horizontal rule
45

44: Jobist.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:27 PM
horizontal rule
46

41: Jobsist.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:29 PM
horizontal rule
47

46: Hossenpfeffer Incorporated!


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:31 PM
horizontal rule
48

Speaking of shows that are on public radio, does anyone have any opinions about "The Splendid Table"?

They're doing a trial run on the Austin station, and we're supposed to vote "spatulas up" or "spatulas down" as to whether it gets a regular slot. I simply cannot bear to listen to the unctious sounds of Lynne Rossetto Kaspar's voice for more than a minute or two (although I like her cookbooks fine), and so want to vote no to keep them off my radio. But I feel guilty about that somehow and will probably just not vote and then make sure I never ever listen to the radio between 11 and noon on Sundays.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:45 PM
horizontal rule
49

we're supposed to vote "spatulas up" or "spatulas down"

This is confusing. Spatulas down, presumably taking the proxy for "Nay" here, could plausibly be an "Aye" vote, if you think about it. After all, when one's spatula is down, one is preparing something without incident; things are copacetic.

An up-spatula, on the other hand, could indicate a moment of pause: confusion, a mistake, frustration perhaps.

Therefore, I vote simply spatula, as they deserve confusion pie for the confusing ingredients they've thrown in the damn thing.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:49 PM
horizontal rule
50

"taking the proxy"? That can't be right. Who am I, and what have I done with my English?


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:51 PM
horizontal rule
51

49: What is the sound of one spatula?


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:52 PM
horizontal rule
52

Naughty By Design?


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:54 PM
horizontal rule
53

Hey, OPINIONATED ILLITERATE, didn't I meet you last week? You know, at the Tea Party?


Posted by: MAE | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:55 PM
horizontal rule
54

52: No, but dutiful.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:55 PM
horizontal rule
55

we're supposed to vote "spatulas up" or "spatulas down"

I read this, and started a whole comment about hey, they're doing that here, too! I erased it.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 2:59 PM
horizontal rule
56

Your fathers didn't say "En Bee Dee"? Mine certainly did, and how.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 3:00 PM
horizontal rule
57

On "The Splendid Table," I dunno. Last week I endured in the background an entire radio conversation about how to prepare possum (I think). I'd do without that show, but I gather the callers find it of value.


Posted by: parsimon | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 3:07 PM
horizontal rule
58

an entire radio conversation about how to prepare possum (I think)

If you can't tell what animal a particular piece of roadkill was originally, I'd advise against cooking it.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 3:17 PM
horizontal rule
59

58: (because once it's been pulverized by traffic that much, it's really best served tartare).


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 3:18 PM
horizontal rule
60

48: Spatula upside the head!

If you're a foodie it's probably worth developing a tolerance for the voice. I'm whatever the opposite of a foodie is (a poopie? a barfie?), but I've managed to enjoy the occasional bit of an episode, though I have to switch stations when they try stuff as the quasi-sexual grunts of appreciation make me homicidal.


Posted by: togolosh | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 4:46 PM
horizontal rule
61

60: you eat poop?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 4:49 PM
horizontal rule
62

Also, M/tch misspelled unctuous.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 4:50 PM
horizontal rule
63

Togolosh means "rabbit".


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 4:53 PM
horizontal rule
64

you eat poop?

All wage labor is coprophagy.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 5:04 PM
horizontal rule
65

I hate to bring this thread off-topic, but in a concurrence in this decision I think I read somewhere that Roberts wrote something about "balancing the harm to society against the harm of restricting speech" being a terrible way to decide what narrow exceptions to allow for the 1st amendment, specifically in response to Kagan's argument. And in that same somewhere, I read a bunch of people arguing about whether the exception for child porn uses that rationale. But I think a much better comparison would be obscenity laws.

So, how are obscenity laws justified by the SC?


Posted by: pdf23ds | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 5:44 PM
horizontal rule
66

To be smut it must be utterly without redeeming social importance.


Posted by: Not Prince Hamlet | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 6:02 PM
horizontal rule
67

But that's exactly the position that Roberts excoriates in his concurrence. Is he at odds with the established law on this one?


Posted by: pdf23ds | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 6:08 PM
horizontal rule
68

Ask my aunt Hortense.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 6:13 PM
horizontal rule
69

If she isn't established law I really don't know what is.


Posted by: Not Prince Hamlet | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 6:18 PM
horizontal rule
70

From Kagan's brief:

To determine whether a certain class of speech enjoys First Amendment protection, this Court has preformed a categorical balancing analysis, comparing the expressive value of the speech with its societal costs. Where the First Amendment value of the speech is "clearly outweighed" by its societal costs, the speech may be prohibited based on its content.

From Roberts' opinion:

As a free-floating test for First Amendment coverage, that sentence is startling and dangerous. The First Amendment's guarantee of free speech does not extend only to categories of speech that survive an ad hoc balancing of relative social costs and benefits. The First Amendment itself reflects a judgment by the American people that the benefits of its restrictions on the Government outweigh the costs. Our Constitution forecloses any attempt to revise that judgment simply on the basis that some speech is not worth it. The Constitution is not a document "prescribing limits, and declaring that those limits may be passed at pleasure."

Later in his opinion, Roberts says how that reasoning doesn't apply to child porn, but it those distinctions don't justify the prohibition of obscene content in general. So there must be some other reasoning, right? Or not?


Posted by: pdf23ds | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 6:22 PM
horizontal rule
71

From Lehrer's song:

Stories of tortures
Used by debauchers,
Lurid, licentious, and vile,
Make me smile.


Posted by: Not Prince Hamlet | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 6:24 PM
horizontal rule
72

Roberts' opinion isn't a concurrence, it's the court ruling. I'm not sure I understand the question.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 11:01 PM
horizontal rule
73

I assumed "NBD" meant "Nota bene, Diane" for a while, but eventually figured it out.


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 04-22-10 11:04 PM
horizontal rule
74

We're recording tonight, so we have to leave this comment out of it.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 04-23-10 1:13 AM
horizontal rule
75

63: It does? I am confused. I think I will eat poop.


Posted by: togolosh | Link to this comment | 04-23-10 6:42 AM
horizontal rule
76

I think, therefore I eat poop.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-23-10 6:48 AM
horizontal rule
77

I assumed "NBD" meant "Nota bene, Diane" for a while, but eventually figured it out.

I still haven't figured that out. Help?


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 04-23-10 7:11 AM
horizontal rule
78

I assumed No Big Deal.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-23-10 7:15 AM
horizontal rule
79

78. So did I, but I'd prefer it to mean National Bank of Dubai, because a link to the SCOTUS from that would be fun.


Posted by: OFE | Link to this comment | 04-23-10 7:19 AM
horizontal rule
80

So I didn't get something completely obvious. BFD.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 04-23-10 7:41 AM
horizontal rule
81

78: Correcto.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-23-10 8:56 AM
horizontal rule