- Sep 2, 2008
- Reaction score
the supreme court justices are a bright bunch. But chances are you’re not going to see them at next january’s ces show or ever watch them on a web video demonstrating how to create apps for the iphone.
That much was driven home, it seems, during today’s oral arguments in the case city of ontario v. Quon.
The case examines whether a california police department violated the constitutional rights of an employee when it inspected personal text messages sent and received by a pager owned by the city of ontario, calif.
according to this post, at dc dicta, the court asked some questions of the lawyers which, well, the justices’ kids and grandkids could have answered while sleepwalking.
According to the story, the first sign of trouble came was about midway through the argument, when chief justice john roberts asked what the difference was “between email and a pager?” (cue sound of hard slap against forehead.)
at another point, justice anthony kennedy asked what would happen if a text message was sent to an officer at the same time he was sending one to someone else.
“does it say: ‘your call is important to us, and we will get back to you?’” kennedy asked. (cue sound of louder slap against forehead.)
justice antonin scalia stumbled getting his arms around with the idea of a service provider.
“you mean (the text) doesn’t go right to me?” he asked.
then he asked whether they can be printed out in hard copy.
“could quon print these spicy little conversations and send them to his buddies?” scalia asked.
maybe the justices are against cameras in the court because when they think of cameras, they think of those huge cameras on tripods with the cloth to cover the photographers and the supernova flash-bulbs.