1. thepumphandle
  2. Sarah Palin's Supreme Discomfort

Sarah Palin's Supreme Discomfort

By sb admin on October 2, 2008.

By now, you've probably heard that VP nominee Sarah Palin has been tripped up a few times by tough questions from CBS New's Katie Couric.  Real brain twisters like: 

"what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this to stay informed and to understand the world?â

"[Besides Roe v. Wade] what other Supreme Court decisions do you disagree with?"

Just in case the Supreme Court question is resurrected at tonight's televised VP Debate, I've got a few recommendations for Ms. Palin to consider:

District of Columbia v. Heller (2008): in a 5-4 decision the Supreme Court ruled the District of Columbia's handgun ban violated the Second Amendment.

 
Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber (2007): in a 5-4 decision the Supreme Court ruled that employees must file lawsuits under federal anti-discrimination laws within 180 days after their pay rate is set, even if they don't learn about the initial discriminatory act until long after the incident occurs.  (Ms. Lilly Ledbetter didn't realize she was being paid substantially less than her male colleagues until years later.)

Bush v. Gore: (2007): the Supreme Court ruled that the Florida recount violated the 14th amendment and allowed the Florida Secretary of State, Katherine Harris, to certify the vote tally favoring of G.W. Bush.

If VP Nominee Palin were a fan of The Pump Handle, she might have mentioned:

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993): the Supreme Court instructed federal judges to examine the scientific method underlying expert evidence and to only admit that which is both "relevent and reliable."  (See more here and here) 

Or if the Alaska Governor were a history buff, she might have mentioned:

Plessy v. Ferguson: the historic (1896) Supreme Court decision (7-1) which ruled "separate but equal" was constitutional even with respect to public services like railroads and schools.  The ruling was overturned in the landmark 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision.

Tonight, Mrs. Palin won't have to face that pesky Katie Couric and her brain twisters.  But watch out!  PBS's Gwen Ifill might just ask who her favorite Cabinet Secretaries are.

Tags
Confined Space @ TPH

More like this

ConnectiCOSH and Sotomayor
Updated below (7/18/09) What does Supreme Court justice nominee Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation hearing before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee have to do with a COSH group, specifically the Connecticut Council on Occupational Safety and Health (ConnectiCOSH)? Well, one of the witnesses…
Palin-spastic: Mens vacuus
Jonathan Martin's Blog: In reintroduction, Palin to do more interviews and "tell her story" - Politico.com: Of concern to McCain's campaign, however, is a remaining and still-undisclosed clip from Palin's interview with Couric last week that has the political world buzzing. The [anonymous] Palin…
Other Supreme Court decisions with public-health implications
The Supreme Court's decisions on marriage equality and the Voting Rights Act got a lot of media attention last week, but several of the Court's other decisions also have implications for public health -- and they came down on the side of employers, real-estate developers, and drug manufacturers. In…
The Supreme Court's Influence on Public Health
On the eve of the election, The Nation reminds us that the next president will play a crucial role in determining the makeup of the Supreme Court. Herman Schwartz describes the Court's current makeup and rattles off current rulings that would be threatened by the appointment of another…

those are really great suggestions, I must say.
Especially the Bush v. Gore case.
I was definitely in more pain then than when Brazil lost the world cup to France in â98

There is also the Supreme Court decision this summer reducing the awards to Alaskans injured by the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989.

Ooh, the Exxon decision's a great addition to the list!

And if Palin cares so much about Roe v. Wade, she ought to know about Griswold v. Connecticut - that's the decision that invalidated a CT law against contraception, on the grounds that it violated privacy.