Review of Major Rulings from the Supreme Court’s 2002-2003 Term
___________________________________________________________
Review of Less-Publicized Rulings from the Supreme Court’s 2002-2003 Term
Baird vs. Texas – Ruling overturned the conviction of a Laredo man in a robbery wherein the prosecution’s case consisted solely of the facts that “he was black, and he was nearby.”
Vote: 8-1
From the dissenting opinion (Clarence Thomas): “The man clearly looked guilty. This ruling opens the door for more and more “uppity” behavior from negroes everywhere. As Frederick Douglas might have written, black people don’t need your charity, they need a little discipline.”
Dawson vs. Texas – Ruling overturned the sentencing of a Lubbock man who was convicted of violating sodomy laws when he glanced at a policeman “all sexy-like and stuff.”
Vote: 7-2
From the dissenting opinion (Antonin Scalia): “If we give men the right to look at other men in a lewd manner, then aren’t we also giving men the right to anally violate dead, underage rabbits? I’m pretty sure we are. (Mmmm… furry, furry rabbits…)”
Tinsley vs. Bordick: Ruling upheld a discrimination suit wherein a Kentucky business was denying executive washroom access to anyone “darker than rye bread.”
Vote: 8-1
From the dissenting opinion (Thomas): “American blacks do not require access to the white man’s washrooms, drinking fountains, or bus seats. They require only dignity. And to stop being so goldarned lazy.”
Kradick vs. Texas: Ruling overturned a murder conviction against a Tomball man who opted not to sleep with his girlfriend, thus failing to impregnate her.
Vote: 6-3
From the dissenting opinion (William Rehnquist): “Have we come to place so little value on human life that we can deafen ourselves to the cries of an infant whose right to be conceived was so grossly violated? Shame, shame…”
Turling vs. Black People: Ruling found a new Texas law making black people illegal to be unconstitutional.
Vote: 8-1
From the dissenting opinion (Thomas): “Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that it’s “okay” to be black. This is affirmative action at its most dangerous. Honestly, I don’t know what the other guys were thinking on this one.”





9 comments
Don
June 27, 2003 at 2:51 pm
1Once again we give you our thanks, Adam, for keeping us up to date on the critical matters that somehow keeping “falling below the radar” of the Mainstream Media.
I am particularly impressed by the manner in which that Great Sovereign Republic of Texas maintains its position on the ragged cutting edge of so many of these vital issues.
And I am certain that your readers will experience a heightened level of respect for those distinguished members of the Court that you have quoted for our benefit and edification.
Chicory
June 27, 2003 at 3:28 pm
2I was going to comment but Don’s erudite review has me in awe. Much like the remarks of Thomas and Scalia do. Or, is that shock.
Shock and Awe! That’s what it is. ;-D
Cygna
June 27, 2003 at 4:13 pm
3Nahhhh, most of these would never happen, because doesn’t Thomas vote with Scalia, like, 100% of the time? He did his first year or two, at least.
Catherine
June 27, 2003 at 6:45 pm
4Or as the Capitol Steps put it, “How do you solve a problem like Scalia?”
Jon H
June 27, 2003 at 7:08 pm
5Thanks Adam, for helping to alert the nation to this assault on States’ Straight White Non-Buggering Citizens’ Rights.
Kyria
June 29, 2003 at 5:59 am
6Hey Adam, I found your blog! Now all I have to do is read it.
- Kyria
Kevin
June 29, 2003 at 12:48 pm
7Re: Tinsley v. Bordick
Having spent more time in Kentucky than I care to admit, I must take issue with the “darker than rye bread” comment. Kentuckians are almost totally unaware of the concept of rye bread. In fact, I’m not sure that a native of that state would be able to identify a bread product that wasn’t white. On the plus side, Kentucky is relatively Starbuck’s-free. That’s about the only good thing I can say….
senor robot
July 1, 2003 at 2:23 pm
8Adam, any time you can use the word “uppity” is just plain funny.
John Isbell
July 4, 2003 at 7:17 pm
9“How do you solve a problem like Scalia?”
That’s one I’ll remember. Adam, I’ve just emailed a bunch of your posts, twice, to various people. Is it me or are you getting more brutal with the years? In a gentlemanly way.