The Riot Squad They're Restless, They Need Somewhere to Go

Congratulations to Mr. Joseph R. Halbert for correctly naming "Josephine" by The Wallflowers as the Thursday Song of the Day.

I strongly urge all Running Down a Dream readers to visit Joey's new blog, The Young Oak, which is probably the only blog that will feature erudite discussions of the WWE, theology, and Texas state politics.

Is Rick Perry truly the Texas gubernatorial equivalent of Triple H or Rowdy Roddy Piper? Is the McMahon family a prime example of the Trinitarian Nature of God? Read The Young Oak for the answers, my friends.

Closing on a different note, after finishing Jeffrey Toobin's The Nine just a few days ago, I found his May 25, 2009 New Yorker piece on Chief Justice John G. Roberts an interesting (quasi)-epilogue* to the book. It's not a quick read, but if you're interested in the current direction of the Supreme Court, I think it's worth your time.

*Sorry for channeling Peter King for a moment there. I realize only about 3 people who read this will catch that reference, but it's worth making.

Picture Yourself in the Living Room

I couldn't help but notice tonight during the Annual Group Squat-Thrust Session that is the State of the Union Address that the Supreme Court justices are all seated in a very prominent position on the floor of the House of Representatives.

They are approximately at the President's 2 o'clock reference point as he looks out upon the audience, but strangely, despite all of the hubbub going on around them, they never stand up, they never applaud, and they remain as dispassionate as Dick Cheney at a Jay-Z concert.
If I were a speechwriter for the President, a Toby Ziegler, if you will, I would do whatever I could to get the justices out of their chairs and on their feet, even if that meant severely pushing the bounds of ethics and reality.

Some examples:

• "Beginning in the 2010-2011 fiscal year, Supreme Court justice salaries will no longer be paid in U.S. Dollars. From that date forward, salaries will paid in gold dubloons. Yes, gold dubloons."
• "Effective immediately, we're doing away with all of that 'Oyez, Oyez, Oyez' mumbo-jumbo when the justices enter the court for oral argument, and each justice will be able to choose his or her own entrance music. A stipend for pyrotechnics and/or a smoke machine will be provided to each justice."
• "I know that some of you on the court are jealous of Chief Justice Roberts because of the notoriety that he receives for being 'the Chief.' Fear not, associate justices. After viewing the Sly Stallone film Over the Top, I'm instituting arm-wrestling matches as a method for allowing associate justices to challenge the chief's place of supremacy on the court."
  

Come and Keep Your Comrade Warm

As noted in yesterday's post, I've recently begun reading Jeffrey Toobin's "The Nine." As I was reading the book, I flipped to the picture section in the middle (don't act like you don't do the same thing), and noticed the following picture.

We all recognize the event as President Bush's introduction of now Chief Justice John Roberts as his choice to succeed the departing Sandra Day O'Connor, but what I found interesting was the caption below the picture, which states:

"President Bush introduces Roberts as his nominee to replace O'Connor on July 19, 2005. To the side are Roberts' wfie, Jane, and daughter, Josephine. His son, Jack, is imitating Spider-Man."

To which I say, "Jack Roberts, that's the worst Spider-Man impression I HAVE EVER SEEN."

If the caption had said that Jack Roberts was imitating the Damon Wayans-version of "The Robot" in Major Payne, I could have accepted that. If it would have said that he was doing the world's worst sleight of hand trick by hiding something in his pocket, I could have accepted that. Do you think David Blaine is going to give you the call-up to the magic big leagues with those kind of bush-league tactics? Not happening.

But an imitation of Spider-Man? No way, young Jack Roberts. Does Spider-Man patrol the mean streets in a seersucker short suit and saddle shoes? No way in Hades, unless he wants to end up on the business end of a swirly.

With that said, I hope you're reading this, Jack. I hope that as we approach the 5-year anniversary of this event this summer, perhaps you've learned your lesson in imitating Peter Parker. There's nothing more embarrassing than kids who can't properly imitate superheroes.

You'd Know What a Drag It is to See You

Current Reading
The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court by Jeffrey Toobin

I Can't Stand It, I Know You Planned It

Congratulations to Mr. Alan Robertson for correctly naming "Sittin' on the Dock of the Bay" by Otis Redding as the Wednesday Song of the Day.

Big news today in the legal world with President Obama's nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to replace David Souter on the Supreme Court. While everyone else will spend hours poring over Judge Sotomayor's legal opinions, I say that the one true test of her qualifications to serve on the high court is a full breakdown of the high-jump technique of the other "famous" (I use the term loosely) Sotomayor, the current world record-holder in the high-jump, Javier Sotomayor.

Question of the Day:

Justin, can I root for Manchester United instead of Barcelona tomorrow's Champions League Final?

Answer:

Sure, if you would have also supported the Axis in World War II.

Current Reading

American Caesar--Douglas MacArthur 1880-1964 by William Manchester

Moving Pictures Helped Us Get Through September

I'm probably not going to have nearly as much to say about this case as Prof. CrimPro or Prof. Osler, but the decision from the SCOTUS today in Herring v. United States is an interesting one:

Mr. Herring had gone to the Coffee County, Ala., sheriff’s department on July 7, 2004, to retrieve something from his truck, which had been impounded.

Mark Anderson, an investigator for the sheriff’s department, who asked a Coffee County clerk if there were any outstanding warrants for Mr. Herring. No, Mr. Anderson was told. So he asked the clerk to check with her counterpart in neighboring Dale County, who turned up a warrant against Mr. Herring for failing to appear in court on a felony charge.


Mr. Anderson and a deputy following Mr. Herring as he left the impound lot pulled him over and arrested him. A search turned up methamphetamine in his pocket and a pistol, which Mr. Herring could not legally possess because of an earlier felony conviction, in his truck.

Within minutes, however, the Dale County clerk discovered that the warrant against Mr. Herring had been withdrawn five months earlier and had been left in the computer system by mistake. The clerk immediately called Mr. Anderson, but Mr. Herring had already been taken into custody.

Was Mr. Herring entitled to go free because the officers lacked probable cause and there was no dispute that both the arrest and subsequent search were unconstitutional? No, the Supreme Court ruled.

“When police mistakes leading to an unlawful search are the result of isolated negligence attenuated from the search, rather than systemic error or reckless disregard of constitutional requirements, the exclusionary rule does not apply,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote.

Boy, You Better Learn to Express Yourself

Congratulations to Ms. Amanda Pierce for correctly naming "Chariot" by Gavin DeGraw as the Wednesday Song of the Day. Luke, the gauntlet has been laid down, my friend.

I've played in a few pickup soccer games in the past two or three years but none quite like this.
God bless you, Steve Nash, and God truly bless you, Thierry Henry.

Furthermore, in the more important news of the day, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision in the much awaited case of D.C. v. Heller. Justice Scalia's opinion can be found here. Read it, learn it, love it.

Don't Touch Me, I'm a Real Live Wire

Congratulations to Mr. Peter Pope for correctly naming "Supposed to Be" by Jack Johnson as the Tuesday Song of the Day.

I realize that all of the warning signs are there (Phish fandom, 4/20 references, and posts about Bong Hits 4 Jesus), but this blog and its author are, and always have been, marijuana free. With that said, there's one more point about the Morse case that I wrote about last week that bears mentioning.

Prof. Civil Liberties informed us that when the Supreme Court granted certiorari on Morse v. Frederick, a substantial number of the justices on the U.S. Supreme Court had no idea what the words "bong hit" meant. As I have stated previously in this post, I have no personal knowledge of the intricacies of such an event myself, but it absolutely blew my mind that some of the greatest legal minds in America had no idea what the phrase "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" might entail.

Granted, the phrase is nonsensical, but it seems that the intense focus necessary to sit on the highest court in the United States also renders one oblivious to the continuing evolution of drug slang in the culture at large.

Other shocking admissions from Supreme Court justices:

• Associate Justice Stephen Breyer: "When is Nirvana putting out another album? This Cobain guy is really falling behind."

• Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg: "I'm thinking about buying property in El Dorado, Texas. Seems like a quiet place with normal folks."

• Associate Justice Samuel Alito: "I think Isiah Thomas just needs a shot with another team with more cap space."

• Associate Justice Clarence Thomas: "(Silence)."

• Associate Justice David Souter: "Paul McCartney? Never heard of him."
  

We All Went to Heaven in a Little Row Boat

Congratulations once again to Mr. Andrew Shipp (a.k.a. “The T.J. Hooker, excuse me, Hooper”) for correctly naming "Round Here" by Counting Crows as the Thursday Song of the Day.

In the interest of full disclosure, the following series will probably have a brief, meteoric run for obvious reasons...

You Better Know a Supreme Court Litigant

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to the first in a series of posts aiming to provide you with a more concrete connection to the Supreme Court of the United States. Solely for the purposes of efficiency, I will use SCOTUS throughout the rest of this post and the ones to come. You like acronyms, don't you?

Yesterday in Civil Liberties, during the portion of the syllabus dealing with symbolic speech, we covered the recently decided case of Morse v. Frederick*. In addition to a discussion of the legal principles involved in the resolution of the matter, we were also enlightened on the inner-workings in the field of ceramic drug paraphernalia. Some of you might know the Frederick case by its alternate name, "Bong Hits 4 Jesus".

A quick summary of the facts follows:

The dispute arose in advance of the Winter Olympics of 2002. The Olympic torch relay was passing through Juneau as the torch was on its way to Salt Lake City, and Juneau schools decided to turn the event into a teachable moment by letting students watch.

At Juneau-Douglas High School, Principal Deborah Morse allowed students, under supervision, to watch the torch runner pass in front of the school. School cheerleaders and the pep band performed.

Some students watched from across the street as well. In that group, student Joseph Frederick had other plans for when the torch passed. As cameras recorded the moment, he and other students unfurled a large banner that read: "BONG HITS 4 JESUS." He later described it as a humorous, meaningless, and not at all pro-drug, message.

When Morse asked the students to take down the banner, all complied except Frederick, who asserted his First Amendment rights. Morse grabbed and crumpled the banner and suspended Frederick for five days. During a later discussion, according to his brief, Frederick quoted Thomas Jefferson to her -- and his suspension was increased to 10 days. Frederick sued in federal court.

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for a 5-person majority, asserted that although students do have some right to political speech even while in school, this right does not extend to pro-drug messages that may undermine the school's important mission to discourage drug use. The majority held that Frederick's message, though "cryptic," was reasonably interpreted as promoting marijuana use - equivalent to "[Take] bong hits" or "bong hits [are a good thing]." In ruling for Morse, the Court affirmed that the speech rights of public school students are not as extensive as those adults normally enjoy.

That's all very well and good, but besides learning that I could not have walked into Whitehouse High School wearing my favorite "Bong Hits for Cheech and Chong" jacket** without expecting some type of punishment, the truly interesting aspect of this case, at least for me, was that Frederick was actually the cousin of some of my best friends growing up.

Although I cannot say that I would have laid a little cash on the proposition that Frederick would be the only person I have ever met that was a Supreme Court litigant, in hindsight, it does not seem like a very risky wager. Frederick grew up in Henderson, which for those of you who know East Texas, is just a county over from the Tyler/Whitehouse/Bullard metropolitan area. My friends Bryan and Brad (Frederick's cousins) would frequently comment that their cousin was one of the more outspoken/wacky kids that they had ever met, but when you're in middle school, who isn't a bit odd?

After Frederick's parents divorced, he went with his Dad to Alaska, which is why he found himself on a Juneau street in 2002, watching the Olympic Torch pass by and waiting to unfurl a banner that would ultimately lead him to the SCOTUS.
Following the events of 1/24/02, he received a settlement from the Juneau Police Department for harassment happening after the Bong Hits incident, and his father received a settlement from his employer -- the school district's insurance company (he claims he was fired for not pressuring Joseph into dropping the suit).

Frederick is now teaching English in China.

This has been the first post in the series "You Better Know a Supreme Court Litigant". Any suggestions for future posts in the series would be greatly appreciated.

*Morse v. Frederick, 75 LW 4487 (2007)
**I did not own one of these, nor do I think that one actually exists.

I'm Still Out on Sunset in a Taxicab

2007: A Look Back at a Year in the Life of Running Down a Dream

January

• 1: I went to sleep before the end of the Fiesta Bowl. You can always see the winning running-back propose to his girlfriend, but after a Statue of Liberty play? That's too much.
• 16: My 23rd birthday. I commiserate with Blink 182 and Coolio.
• 20: The first 2008 Presidential Roll Call. Tom Tancredo, we hardly knew ye.

February:

• 6: I announce my devotion to Liverpool F.C., chaos ensues.
• 14: Valentine's Day and a few lessons learned.
• 26: Martin Scorcese's eyebrows are the stuff nightmares are made of.

March:

• 3: I begin screaming at computer screens at 7:30 in the morning over football matches being played in England. This might be a problem.
• 5: Pound the Rock.
• 16: I develop the paranoia of a crackhead after keeping a perfect bracket for the first two days of the NCAA tournament.
• 29: I plead with the Rangers to become relevant once again. Sadly, they do not comply.

April:

• 8: A snowstorm of biblical proportions descends on the Tyler metropolitan area. No one besides the newscasters is remotely fazed.
• 11: Mmmmmmmmmmmmmm, Dead Poets Society.
• 16: Rolling Stone's Top 10 Songs of All-Time along with Joey Halbert's dissent.
• 23: The death of a true legend in his own time.
• 25: The legendary Chelsea-Liverpool running diary.

May:

• 3: "I'm a lion among men" and other quotable quotes from Tyler area defendants.
• 12: Small town election conspiracy theories in Whitehouse.
• 16: Still one of the best YouTube videos I've ever seen.
• 30: My parents purchase furniture from Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

June:

• 10: My return from the Agan-Freede wedding and the inevitable repudiation of Lou Gehrig.
• 13: Houston v. Dallas: The Great Debate.
• 20: Andrew Tuegel and I discuss the extension of Jon Daniels's contract as Rangers GM.
• 27: Lance and Kayla Agan, Cody Girod, Bethany Freede, Austin Brennen, Alex LaBounty and yours truly enter the Shakey-Face Pantheon.

Check back tomorrow for the July-December recap.

I May Talk in My Sleep Tonight

• As I speculated a few days ago, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case of Heller v. District of Columbia on appeal from the D.C. Circuit Court. An exact date for oral argument has not been set, but this will be one of the most eagerly anticipated cases in recent years from our highest court.
• There must be something about a 2007 Major League Baseball Most Valuable Player award that makes you lose in the first round of the playoffs. Alex Rodriguez was announced as the A.L. winner yesterday, and shortstop Jimmy Rollins of the Philadelphia Phillies won the award in the N.L. Then again, an N.L. MVP has not played on a World Series champion since Kirk Gibson with the Dodgers in '88, and an A.L. MVP has not featured on a team winning it all since Willie Hernandez with the Tigers in 1984.
  
• Finally, I have been catching a ton of flack from friends and foes for my decision to wear the following shirt as a joke at a "Round-Up" themed Wilderness Trek fundraiser.

• I'm pretty sure I do not need to direct you to my location in the photo, but for those of you who are a bit slow with context clues, I can be found on the left clad in garb that would bring a tear to the eye of Sam Houston, Stephen F. Austin, or anyone that possesses any indicia of fashion sense. I must reveal that the shirt was proffered to me as an opportunity to "stand out" at the event. I'll tell you this: It was all that and more.

Hey Man, Slow Down, Slow Down

Congratulations to Mr. James Watson Kizer (a.k.a. Jim) for correctly naming "Wish You Were Here" by Incubus as the Sunday Song of the Day. If the song had instead been "Wish You Were Here" by Pink Floyd, I harbor no fantasies that anyone but Tim Henderson would have seen their name in lights.

Due to the fact that as of approximately 3:30 this afternoon I have one Constitutional Law class under my belt, I feel a compulsion to comment on what might be a groundbreaking moment for the Roberts Court. This week, the Court has the opportunity to grant certiorari on a landmark 2nd Amendment case from the District of Columbia. The specific law in question bans all handguns in the District and requires any other guns in citizens' homes to be disassembled or secured by trigger locks.

Today, even though it often seems that all of the truly pressing and juicy constitutional questions have been answered, the Supreme Court has never truly addressed the scope and practical application of the 2nd Amendment in such a direct manner as is presented in District of Columbia v. Heller. Many of you who frequently read this blog may have no interest whatsoever in cases that could be possibly decided by the United States Supreme Court (Katie, I'm looking at you), and I can understand such a mindset to a certain extent but I cannot forgive it.

The decisions of the nine members of the Supreme Court do not exist in a vacuum. They have practical applications and implications for each and every person that lives or visits this country. Part of our national fabric is formed through the interpretation of the document that structures, regulates, and directs our journey. I understand that perhaps everyone cannot be expected to name each of the current justices (Stevens, Roberts, Ginsburg, Thomas, Alito, Breyer, Souter, Kennedy, and Scalia if you're scoring at home), but to act as if the decisions that are handed down from Washington are irrelevant to the lives that we lead is to join the ostriches by placing our collective head in the sand.

Current Reading

Atonement by Ian McEwan

Just Like Your Dad, You'll Never Change

I ran across this interesting editorial in today's Wall Street Journal concerning the upcoming oral arguments that will be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Stoneridge v. Scientific Atlanta.

The essential question posed by the case is whether a business can be sued for doing business with another firm because the 2nd firm engaged in fraudulent activity that the first business had no knowledge of, or at the most, was passively involved in. The trial court and appeals court answered no, but we will have to wait and see how Roberts & Co. tackle a question that if answered in the affirmative could lead to an avalanche of new lawsuits.

Current Reading

Men at Work: The Craft of Baseball by George F. Will