{"id":55869,"date":"2022-07-02T17:17:34","date_gmt":"2022-07-02T21:17:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sidebarforplaintiffs.naomifein.net\/?p=55869"},"modified":"2022-07-02T17:17:34","modified_gmt":"2022-07-02T21:17:34","slug":"how-can-we-confront-this-bizarre-destructive-scotus","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sidebarforplaintiffs.naomifein.net\/?p=55869","title":{"rendered":"How can we confront this bizarre, destructive SCOTUS?"},"content":{"rendered":"

One word answer: Bedazzled.<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

I had a lot of gun control ideas along this line but the New York State Legislature beat me to it — at <\/a>amazing speed.<\/p>\n

Still, I want to offer the Bedazzled<\/em> lesson as lanolin* for our chafed raw souls. Not only because it’s one of the funniest movies ever made, but because the plot is a model of how to defeat this Supreme Court.<\/p>\n

We have Stanley (played by Dudley Moore), a haplessly inarticulate dolt who flips hamburgers in a London greasy spoon joint. He is madly in love with Margaret, a haughty waitress (Eleanor Bron), but can’t manage any sort of approach to her without encountering withering rejection.<\/p>\n

So Stanley tries to kill himself, but is “saved” by an impossibly urbane Devil (Peter Cook) (using George as his nom de provocateur)<\/em>. For reasons involving a contract he has with the Almighty, George needs souls, and Stanley is willing to sell his soul in exchange for winning the heart (and body) of Margaret. Ergo, George grants Stanley seven wishes, which Stanley uses to achieve Margaret.<\/p>\n

Only a few fucked-up wishes in does George remind Stanley that, as the Chief Malefactor, he’s bound to take advantage of every loophole, every slit in Stanley’s wish statements. So, although Stanley aptly identifies the holes in each of his wishes, and thinks he’s sealed them, he’s left other holes elsewhere.<\/p>\n

And here’s where the solution to the relentless nightmare our current Supreme Court has dragged us screaming into. Flip the Bedazzled<\/em> characters upside down. View the Supreme Court as a dimwitted but vicious Stanley, whose rush to sexual success with Margaret causes him to leave gaps in the logic of his aspirational wishes.<\/p>\n

So who plays the Devil in my scenario? Genuinely intelligent legal scholars and law-writers who see the Constitutional holes in the Six’s reasoning, and can slip through them, turn around and seal them up with legislation, just as my own State legislature did.<\/p>\n

So see the movie which Google tells me is playing on a couple of oddly named channels available on Roku.<\/p>\n

But more important, read Jamelle Bouie’s calm analysis of some portions of our Constitution. His Times essay, “The Supreme Court Is the Final Word on Nothing<\/a>,” soothed me down.<\/p>\n

Here are a couple of paragraphs, lanolin for my brain — and for my bolding:<\/p>\n

\n
\n

…the Constitution tells us that the court\u2019s appellate jurisdiction is subject to \u201csuch Exceptions\u201d and \u201cunder such Regulations\u201d as \u201cthe Congress shall make.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n