# Supreme Court dick moves **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [June 26, 2012, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-dick-moves/626326 "2012-06-26T05:57:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-dick-moves/626326/21 "2012-06-27T05:07:36Z")
> [@Iggy](#): > > Plenty of dick moves. > > **Decisions** > [Dred Scott v. Sandford](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford) holding persons of African descent were not citizens and not entitled to Constitutional protection. The dicks. > > [Plessy v. Ferguson](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plessy_v._Ferguson) upholding Separate but Equal. The dicks. > \ > [@Doctor\_Who](#): > > Korematsu. Upholding Japanese-American internment during WWII. > > [Korematsu v. United States - Wikipedia](http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korematsu_v._United_States) These along with _Roe v. Wade_ and _Kelo v. City of New London_ ---
**Author:** ![Grrr](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/grrr/32/146_2.png) [@Grrr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grrr)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-dick-moves/626326/22 "2012-06-27T05:21:05Z")
> [@WordMan](#): > > Citizens United was supremely dickish - the justices who claims that any non-Originalist is an Activist Judge™ turn around and take a small-scope case and re-scope it to suit their needs to overturn campaign finance reform and encouraging anonymous money to assert massive influence on campaigns. > > This one will be considered historically hypocritical and dickish over time. > > Dicks. Manchurian Candidate: When fiction becomes real life. Thanks SCOTUS. ---
**Author:** ![Blackzilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Blackzilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blackzilla)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-dick-moves/626326/23 "2012-06-27T13:27:27Z")
[Kelo v. City of New London](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London) is pretty supremely dickish. The city can seize your private property/demolish your house not just for necessary municipal works but for private economic development. > [@](#): > > The city eventually agreed to move Susette Kelo’s house to a new location and to pay substantial additional compensation to other homeowners. The redeveloper was unable to obtain financing and abandoned the redevelopment project, leaving the land as an empty lot,[2] which was eventually turned into a dump by the city. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: Buncha cocks. ---
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-dick-moves/626326/24 "2012-06-27T16:27:34Z")
> [@Blackzilla](#): > > [Kelo v. City of New London](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London) is pretty supremely dickish. The city can seize your private property/demolish your house not just for necessary municipal works but for private economic development. > > :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: > > Buncha cocks. Ah yes, Kelo. The Supreme Court, in its infinite wisdom, decided that local governments can sieze your property, not for any public use, but so that they can sell it to another private party. Gosh, there’s no chance at all that this power might be abused. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-dick-moves/626326/25 "2012-06-27T16:34:41Z")
Not a Supreme Court decision, but a presidential candidate one. When GWB picked his running mate. That was a dick move. ---
**Author:** ![Hypno-Toad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b2d939/32.png) [@Hypno-Toad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hypno-Toad)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-dick-moves/626326/26 "2012-06-27T16:54:14Z")
When I read the thread title, I thought Clarence Thomas had bought a new house. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-dick-moves/626326/27 "2012-06-27T17:01:06Z")
> [@D-bear](#): > > However, the US Supreme Court struck down the law two years later in [Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammer_v._Dagenhart), declaring that the law **violated a child’s right to contract his or her own labor.** Nitpick. It ruled that Congress had exceed its power under the commerce clause as the child labor was wholly intrastate and only the products derived were used interstate. Therefore, Congress could not regulate the former. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-dick-moves/626326/28 "2012-06-27T17:45:43Z")
> [@tdn](#): > > Not a Supreme Court decision, but a presidential candidate one. When GWB picked his running mate. That was a dick move. What about when Richard Nixon got nominated three times? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![thelurkinghorror](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7c8e57/32.png) [@thelurkinghorror](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thelurkinghorror)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-dick-moves/626326/29 "2012-06-27T18:49:41Z")
> [@zamboniracer](#): > > I said at the time that Bush v. Gore was a dick move. The Court had said previously that these electoral matters are for the states themselves to sort out, not us. This time, they said, we have 5 R votes and 4 D votes so we’re going to sort this one out in favor of the Rs, and we are also saying that this case may not be used as precedent. Abandoning their previous principle out of expediency for their favored candidate is a dick move to me. I also disagree with your description of the FlaSC’s decision as a dick move, but it was all 12 years ago and I’m done arguing about it. YMMV. Nitpick of nitpicks: but what makes them D and R? I don’t think we know all their personal voting records and only assume, and D != liberal, as central Pennsylvania or WV will tell you. If it’s by who appointed them, then it should be 6 R 3 D, as Souter was a GHW Bush appointee, and [apparently a registered Republican](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/11/AR2008021102753.html). ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-dick-moves/626326/30 "2012-06-27T18:52:22Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > What about when Richard Nixon got nominated three times? 😉 That was a tricky dick move. ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-dick-moves/626326/31 "2012-06-27T18:54:18Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > These along with _Roe v. Wade_ and _Kelo v. City of New London_ I was going to say Roe vs Wade and I am not opposed to abortion. Lots of people think the Supreme Court was grasping at straws in that ruling regardless if they agree with the outcome or not. It was a badly handled case and the court just made stuff up to come to the conclusion they wanted. ---
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-dick-moves/626326/32 "2012-06-27T19:37:37Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > I was going to say Roe vs Wade and I am not opposed to abortion. Lots of people think the Supreme Court was grasping at straws in that ruling regardless if they agree with the outcome or not. It was a badly handled case and the court just made stuff up to come to the conclusion they wanted. Like Bush/Gore. For me, the verbiage in Bush/Gore that says that this ruling is not to be used as a precedent is admission that ‘we think we’re doing a dick move, and it’s 3 am.’ At least with Roe v. Wade, they acknowledged that the science available didn’t allow them to make a good decision as to whether a fetus at a given age had human rights. ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-dick-moves/626326/33 "2012-06-27T21:17:18Z")
> [@tdn](#): > > Not a Supreme Court decision, but a presidential candidate one. When GWB picked his running mate. That was a dick move. Not that I would want to dredge up way-old shit from days long gone, but now you done done it! Without going into details and re-animating the old zombie dispute, yet I can’t resist remarking: I never believed for one microsecond, even from Day 1, that GWB picked his running mate. I think, and always thought, GWB’s running mate picked GWB’s running mate. Furthermore, I felt, right from the day that GWB’s running mate first announced the choice of GWB’s running mate, that they two of them had had a pre-nuptial agreement all along for exactly that to happen. Yet I don’t recall much discussion of that theory in the media at the time (and I don’t know what was discussed on SDMB because I’m a recent newcomer here). But it’s grated on my nerves ever since. As for general dickishness by SCOTUS (this thread IS about dickishness by SCOTUS, IIRC, right?), I’ll add in general that the current court does strike me as being profoundly partisan, and has produced some seriously corrupt (in the partisan sense, not in the accepting-bribes sense AFAIK) shit in the last 10 years or so, which enough other posters have mentioned here already, that I needn’t repeat them all. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-dick-moves/626326.md?page=1)