In an 8-1 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that an Arizona school violated the law when it strip searched a 13-year-old girl suspected of possessing prescription strength ibuprofen-"the equivalent of two Advils."
Thursday, June 25, 2009
24
Who in fuck dissented??
Ginsburg, Stevens, and Thomas all dissented in part, although I'm not sure how they scored it.
They were waiting to see a photo of the girl before committing for one side or the other.
Yeah, about the personal liability situation, right? Very strange scoring if nobody dissented on the main decision.
No, one justice dissented in FULL. And which one do you think THAT was? Mr. pubic-hair-in-the-coke-bottle, maybe?
From the AP story on this:
"In a dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas found the search legal and said the court previously had given school officials 'considerable leeway' under the Fourth Amendment in school settings."
Ginsberg and Stevens appear to have dissented on that part of the decision finding that the school official involved couldn't be held financially liable for the illegal search. That's a valid point on their part--the liability actually gives teeth to the decision; deters future conduct like this.
It's another victory for governmental immunity. In other words, it's a no-no for gov. entities to do certain things, but they never have to worry about paying for it unless they do it "wilfully and wantonly." Which this, uh, isn't. Apparently.
@Mathnet: Clarence Thomas dissented on the main decision. See my comment above.
Decision here. After Thomas trotted out 'in loco parentis' I stopped reading, because throughout all of it, I kept thinking about pederasty and English public schools.
Justice Thomas dissented after viewing the video of the search several dozen times.
DID YOU GUYS KNOW CLARENCE THOMAS IS AN ASSHOLE?
I just always assume the (1) in an 8-1 is Thomas or Ginsburg depending on the case.
The exposure of pubic hair is a constitutionally protected right, according to Clarence Thomas. He established this legal precedent in his famous ruling on "Me v. The Hot Chick Who Worked For Me Once" (1991).
"In my experience when I was 8 or 10 or 12 years old, you know, we did take our clothes off once a day, we changed for gym, OK? And in my experience, too, people did sometimes stick things in my underwear."
My dentist once tried to write me a scrip for Ibuprofen. "You mean Advil?" I asked. "Well, it's a stronger dosage than you can get over the counter," she said. "So it's like 2 Advil? I'll take Vicodin." I got 10 of 'em.
But where was she actually hiding it???
You would find a lot of things if you shook out my underwear.
Thomas would have supported, had the pills been Long Dong Centrum Silver.
The best part of the Thomas dissent is: “[T]he nationwide drug epidemic makes the war against drugs a pressing concern in every school.â€Â
JORDAN IS A RAT
In my pack today I have Advil, Aleve, Zantac and prescription Albuterol. I'm begging to be stripped.
I'll show them. I'll put a suppository in my shorts.
Now that I think about it, Urban Outfitters -- or wherever The Kids shop these days (Hot Topic?!?! Spencer Gifts?!?!) -- needs to make girl and boy underwear out of material printed with excerpts from this decision. Imagine the satisfaction you;d get when the principal tried to strip search you an got to those underwear?
In the interest of the public good, I'm linking to the faux-Clarence Thomas Twitter: http://twitter.com/clarencethomas
Because everything in it seems oddly plausible.
Not afraid to be service-y!
This. is. treeeeeeeeemendous.
"Can't believe how brazen these RV corporations are. Just received two identical Gulfstream brochures in my office mailbox. Angered."
Clarence Thomas is the Slate of Supreme Court justices.