![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
I like this one. I'm taking it from
linaelyn, who took it from
jelazakazone who got it from
celandineb who received it from
juniperus, who borrowed it from
a_d_medievalist, who nicked it from
pisica: as was demonstrated in an interview with Katie Couric, Sarah Palin was unable to name1 (while under pressure during an interview) any Supreme Court Case other than Roe v. Wade.
The Rules: post information about ONE Supreme Court decision, modern or historic, to your lj. (Any decision, as long as it's not Roe v. Wade.) For those who see this on your f-list, take the meme to your OWN lj to spread the fun.
------------------------------------
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)
This decision overturned earlier rulings going back to Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, which had declared that legally mandated separation of the races did not violate the Constitution. The catchphrase "separate but equal" was used to justify racial segregation in all walks of public life, from transportation to education.
The court in Brown declared unanimously that state laws that mandated separate public schools for black and white students denied black children equal educational opportunities. The decision stated that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal." Racial segregation was declared to be in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
------------------------------------
1 I believe Palin was actually unable to name Supreme Court decisions that she felt were wrongly decided - other than Roe v. Wade. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong on that one.) I suppose if the meme were to ask to post a decision I felt was wrongly decided, it would be Plessy v. Ferguson :)
As an aside, I wonder if any of our current candidates could rattle off famous Canadian Supreme Court decisions. I wonder how many Canadians could. I may be posting a few in the next few days :)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
The Rules: post information about ONE Supreme Court decision, modern or historic, to your lj. (Any decision, as long as it's not Roe v. Wade.) For those who see this on your f-list, take the meme to your OWN lj to spread the fun.
------------------------------------
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)
This decision overturned earlier rulings going back to Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, which had declared that legally mandated separation of the races did not violate the Constitution. The catchphrase "separate but equal" was used to justify racial segregation in all walks of public life, from transportation to education.
The court in Brown declared unanimously that state laws that mandated separate public schools for black and white students denied black children equal educational opportunities. The decision stated that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal." Racial segregation was declared to be in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
------------------------------------
1 I believe Palin was actually unable to name Supreme Court decisions that she felt were wrongly decided - other than Roe v. Wade. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong on that one.) I suppose if the meme were to ask to post a decision I felt was wrongly decided, it would be Plessy v. Ferguson :)
As an aside, I wonder if any of our current candidates could rattle off famous Canadian Supreme Court decisions. I wonder how many Canadians could. I may be posting a few in the next few days :)
no subject
Date: 2008-10-02 05:15 am (UTC)Not that I think Lavallee was necessarily wrongly decided.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-04 03:25 am (UTC)Oooh, that's a good one! I'd forgotten about that one. I was thinking of our abortion, assisted suicide, and euthanasia cases. And a couple civil rights ones, and the same-sex marriage one, though that one didn't go to our Supremes.
You know we studied about five or six major Australian cases in Property? For some reason, it seemed a lot of Canadian property-related jurisprudence was Australian. ?
no subject
Date: 2008-10-02 07:13 am (UTC)I was unaware of that.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-04 03:35 am (UTC)I noticed that! Friendsfriends was very neat to watch this week - and especially cool to see what different people remembered and thought important, and why :) :)
no subject
Date: 2008-10-02 11:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-04 03:37 am (UTC)And I'm sure you know at least one: Miranda :)
no subject
Date: 2008-10-02 02:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-04 03:39 am (UTC)::sigh:: She sure is pretty, though.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-03 03:20 am (UTC)Of course, if I had to choose a decision I disagree with, I'm going with Bush v. Gore. If that had gone the other way, maybe we wouldn't be in the mess we're in right now.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-04 03:43 am (UTC)Well... yeah, but OTOH, she's running for VP. We're not a well-informed society, and it wouldn't surprise me if most Americans (or Canadians) couldn't name a single Supreme Court decision (whether they agreed or disagreed with it), but the potential head of the Executive branch should have some familiarity with the decisions of the head of the Judicial branch.
I do acknowledge that she was under pressure, and the question wasn't a no-brainer, but I wish she'd been able to name even one other case.
Of course, if I had to choose a decision I disagree with, I'm going with Bush v. Gore. If that had gone the other way, maybe we wouldn't be in the mess we're in right now.
::sigh:: Truer words...