As you probably know by now, the Supreme Court yesterday ruled in favor of Vickie Lynn Marshall Anna Nicole Smith by a 9-0 margin in the matter of her continued attempts to get half of her late meal ticket's husband's fortune. Not since Falwell v Flynt have we had a Supreme Court case mentioned on Entertainment Tonight, so this is truly a revelatory moment. Dahlia Lithwick has an amusing article at Slate on what the ruling would look like if the Court wrote for the cable tabloid shows. She adds several sections to the ruling, including this one:
VI.
Did Anna Nicole look good at oral argument?
While Ms. Smith neither testified nor spoke at oral argument, she did attend court, declined all interview requests, wept tastefully at the appropriate moments, and was the proximate cause of a near-media riot outside the courtroom as Access Hollywood battled Entertainment Tonight for the opportunity to more deeply explore the legal nuance of the federal courts' subject matter jurisdiction in state probate cases.
This court herein confesses that there is some disagreement among its membership on the matter of Anna Nicole's wardrobe, with Justice Scalia holding that Ms. Smith's somber black suit was extremely fetching; Justice Breyer concurring in the matter of her suit but dissenting regarding her oversized sunglasses; and Justice Thomas, joining in Justice Breyer's opinion but dissenting as to the length of her skirt.
Justice Souter has filed a separate dissent only insofar as he is still not precisely clear as to who Anna Nicole is, or why the court is hearing her case.
All believable opinions and reasonably funny, though I personally would have thrown in a Long Dong Silver or Coke can reference to Justice Thomas' part. And this section is perhaps even better:
VIII.Should Anna Nicole get a new reality show?
The court finds itself divided on this matter. A plurality of its members, led by Justice Kennedy, finds that it is not within the ambit of the decorum, deference, etiquette, or good taste befitting a former Playboy bunny to nationally televise the private proceedings of her own life. Justice Alito dissents, finding that the episode in which Anna, Sugar Pie, and the crew decamp to Lake Cahuilla for a wacky few days of survival in the wilds was "funny on the merits." Justice Souter has filed a lone dissent in Section VIII, below, observing that, in kinship with Anna Nicole's former husband, he would authorize a reprise of the Anna Nicole Show only if they roll those cameras in "over my dead body."
It is so ordered.
"Funny on the merits" is very, very funny.
- Log in to post comments
I just wanted to take a moment to admit that I rented both Skyscraper and To the Limit. And no, I cannot tell you what the difference between them is. I think Anna was a helocopter pilot in the first and Joe (not John) Travolta appears in the second.
Dave-
You're a brave soul for admitting that. But I'm afraid that's going to have to go in your permanent record. If you're ever nominated for a high-ranking position in the Federal government, this could be a problem.
Ed -
In my defense, I was young (Ok...mid-30's, but young at heart) and only fast-forwarded to the parts where she was naked.
That, and to laugh at her delivering comical dialogue that was not meant to be comical.