https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=3Toddexplain xkcd - User contributions [en]2026-04-17T10:00:44ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.30.0https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2037:_Supreme_Court_Bracket&diff=1618252037: Supreme Court Bracket2018-08-24T13:32:27Z<p>3Todd: Minor reword to clarify plaintiff and defendant ordering of Gibbons v Ogden</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2037<br />
| date = August 24, 2018<br />
| title = Supreme Court Bracket<br />
| image = supreme_court_bracket.png<br />
| titletext = My bracket was busted in the first round; I had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final, probably in a case over who gets to annex Rhode Island.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Each court case needs its own explanation, preferably a small paragraph instead of a sentence in parentheses. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
The {{w|Supreme Court of the United States}} is the highest federal court of the United States. A {{w|Bracket (tournament)|tournament bracket}} is a tree diagram that represents the series of games played during a knockout tournament. [[Randall]] suggests that the winners of the 16 listed court cases will file against each other and then again until the final winner is selected.<br />
<br />
Court cases are typically titled as plaintiff versus defendant. Randall is spoofing this idea by imagining famous United States Supreme Court cases as though they were games in the first round of a single-elimination tournament, similar to college basketball's March Madness, complete with a ranking bracket. "Sweet 16" in the context of a tournament refers to the stage in a tournament where 16 competitors remain. This comic's concept is thus a word play on "court" (court of law / basketball court).<br />
<br />
The cases are, with the winners in bold:<br />
<br />
*{{w|Marbury v. Madison|Marbury v. '''Madison'''}}<br />
(declared a provision of the Judiciary Act unconstitutional; first time that U.S. Supreme Court overturned a law)<br />
<br />
*{{w|McCulloch v. Maryland|'''McCulloch''' v. Maryland}}<br />
(prohibited states from taxing the federal government)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Gibbons v. Ogden|'''Gibbons''' v. Ogden}}<br />
On 01 March 1824, the US Supreme Court decided in favor of Thomas Gibbons in his appeal of a case brought against him by Aaron Ogden in an attempt to prevent Gibbons from operating steamboats to transport goods and passengers between New York City, New York and Elizabethtown, New Jersey. The US Supreme Court decision reversed a prior injunction against Gibbons issued by a New York State court deciding that Ogden held exclusive navigational rights by way of having licensed them from two men to whom the New York State Legislature had granted the navigation rights in several acts between 1798 and 1807. The high court's ruling in this case established that interstate commerce is regulated by the US Congress according to the US Constitution, that interstate navigation is fundamental to interstate commerce, and that therefore the power to regulate interstate navigation in this way rests with the US Congress, not the New York State Legislature.<br />
<br />
*{{w|Near v. Minnesota|'''Near''' v. Minnesota}}<br />
(found that prior restraints on publication violate freedom of the press as protected under the First Amendment)<br />
<br />
*{{w|NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.|'''NLRB''' v. Jones & Laughlin}}<br />
(declared that the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 was constitutional)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Brown v. Board of Education|'''Brown''' v. Board of Education}}<br />
(declared that racially segregated schools were inherently unequal and ordered them integrated)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Gideon v. Wainwright|'''Gideon''' v. Wainwright}}<br />
(gave defendants unable to afford lawyers the right to have the government provide them with defense lawyers)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Griswold v. Connecticut|'''Griswold''' v. Connecticut}}<br />
(right to birth control)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Miranda v. Arizona|'''Miranda''' v. Arizona}}<br />
(required police to inform suspects of their rights)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Loving v. Virginia|'''Loving''' v. Virginia}}<br />
(overturned a ban on interracial marriage)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Roe v. Wade|'''Roe''' v. Wade}}<br />
(right to abortion)<br />
<br />
*{{w|United States v. Nixon|'''United States''' v. Nixon}}<br />
(ordered president Nixon to turn over Watergate tapes)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Bush v. Gore|'''Bush''' v. Gore}}<br />
(disputed 2000 Presidential election)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Lawrence v. Texas|'''Lawrence''' v. Texas}}<br />
(invalidated sodomy laws)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency|'''Massachusetts''' v. EPA}}<br />
(decided that the state of Massachusetts has standing to sue the EPA for not doing enough against global warming)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Obergefell v. Hodges|'''Obergefell''' v. Hodges}}<br />
(allowing same-sex marriage)<br />
<br />
The title text refers to a practice of filling out a March Madness bracket, predicting a winner for each game up to the championship. A bracket is "busted" when the result of a game is not as predicted; because future matchups depend on previous results, the whole bracket is worthless at that point. Randall "had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final", predicting both parties would win all previous rounds and advance to the final game/case. Because Connecticut lost its first-round case to Griswold, his bracket is busted in the first round.<br />
<br />
In the second part of the title text, Randall writes: "I had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final, probably in a case over who gets to annex Rhode Island." In fact, there actually was a Supreme Court case ''Massachusetts v. Connecticut'' (summary at [https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/282/660/ Justia.com], full text at [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17012735467934830012&q=Connecticut+v.+Massachusetts&hl=en&as_sdt=2006 Google Scholar]) dealing with water rights on the Connecticut River, which flows between the two states.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
:[A tournament bracket tree is shown with 16 participants each on the left and right side. From both sides toward the middle the brackets reduce to eight, then four, two, and one line where the latter join to a rectangle in the middle.]<br />
<br />
:[Left side:]<br />
:Marbury - Madison<br />
:McCulloch - Maryland<br />
:Gibbons - Ogden<br />
:Near - Minnesota<br />
:NLRB - Jones & Laughlin<br />
:Brown - Board of Education<br />
:Gideon - Wainwright<br />
:Griswold - Connecticut<br />
<br />
:[Right side:]<br />
:Miranda - Arizona<br />
:Loving - Virginia<br />
:Roe - Wade<br />
:United States - Nixon<br />
:Bush - Gore<br />
:Lawrence - Texas<br />
:Massachusetts - Environmental Protection Agency<br />
:Obergefell - Hodges<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the frame:]<br />
:Now that we've finished the round of 32, the Supreme court will be moving on to the Sweet 16.<br />
<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}</div>3Toddhttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2037:_Supreme_Court_Bracket&diff=1618212037: Supreme Court Bracket2018-08-24T12:56:07Z<p>3Todd: Expanded explanation of Gibbons v Ogden</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2037<br />
| date = August 24, 2018<br />
| title = Supreme Court Bracket<br />
| image = supreme_court_bracket.png<br />
| titletext = My bracket was busted in the first round; I had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final, probably in a case over who gets to annex Rhode Island.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Each court case needs its own explanation, preferably a small paragraph instead of a sentence in parentheses. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
The {{w|Supreme Court of the United States}} is the highest federal court of the United States. A {{w|Bracket (tournament)|tournament bracket}} is a tree diagram that represents the series of games played during a knockout tournament. [[Randall]] suggests that the winners of the 16 listed court cases will file against each other and then again until the final winner is selected.<br />
<br />
Court cases are typically titled as plaintiff versus defendant. Randall is spoofing this idea by imagining famous United States Supreme Court cases as though they were games in the first round of a single-elimination tournament, similar to college basketball's March Madness, complete with a ranking bracket. "Sweet 16" in the context of a tournament refers to the stage in a tournament where 16 competitors remain. This comic's concept is thus a word play on "court" (court of law / basketball court).<br />
<br />
The cases are, with the winners in bold:<br />
<br />
*{{w|Marbury v. Madison|Marbury v. '''Madison'''}}<br />
(declared a provision of the Judiciary Act unconstitutional; first time that U.S. Supreme Court overturned a law)<br />
<br />
*{{w|McCulloch v. Maryland|'''McCulloch''' v. Maryland}}<br />
(prohibited states from taxing the federal government)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Gibbons v. Ogden|'''Gibbons''' v. Ogden}}<br />
On 01 March 1824, the US Supreme Court decided in favor of Thomas Gibbons in a case brought against him by Aaron Ogden in an attempt to prevent Gibbons from operating steamboats to transport goods and passengers between New York City, New York and Elizabethtown, New Jersey. The US Supreme Court decision reversed a prior injunction against Gibbons issued by a New York State court deciding that Ogden held exclusive navigational rights by way of having licensed them from two men to whom the New York State Legislature had granted the navigation rights in several acts between 1798 and 1807. The high court's ruling in this case established that interstate commerce is regulated by the US Congress according to the US Constitution, that interstate navigation is fundamental to interstate commerce, and that therefore the power to regulate interstate navigation in this way rests with the US Congress, not the New York State Legislature.<br />
<br />
*{{w|Near v. Minnesota|'''Near''' v. Minnesota}}<br />
(found that prior restraints on publication violate freedom of the press as protected under the First Amendment)<br />
<br />
*{{w|NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.|'''NLRB''' v. Jones & Laughlin}}<br />
(declared that the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 was constitutional)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Brown v. Board of Education|'''Brown''' v. Board of Education}}<br />
(declared that racially segregated schools were inherently unequal and ordered them integrated)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Gideon v. Wainwright|'''Gideon''' v. Wainwright}}<br />
(gave defendants unable to afford lawyers the right to have the government provide them with defense lawyers)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Griswold v. Connecticut|'''Griswold''' v. Connecticut}}<br />
(right to birth control)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Miranda v. Arizona|'''Miranda''' v. Arizona}}<br />
(required police to inform suspects of their rights)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Loving v. Virginia|'''Loving''' v. Virginia}}<br />
(overturned a ban on interracial marriage)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Roe v. Wade|'''Roe''' v. Wade}}<br />
(right to abortion)<br />
<br />
*{{w|United States v. Nixon|'''United States''' v. Nixon}}<br />
(ordered president Nixon to turn over Watergate tapes)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Bush v. Gore|'''Bush''' v. Gore}}<br />
(disputed 2000 Presidential election)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Lawrence v. Texas|'''Lawrence''' v. Texas}}<br />
(invalidated sodomy laws)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency|'''Massachusetts''' v. EPA}}<br />
(decided that the state of Massachusetts has standing to sue the EPA for not doing enough against global warming)<br />
<br />
*{{w|Obergefell v. Hodges|'''Obergefell''' v. Hodges}}<br />
(allowing same-sex marriage)<br />
<br />
The title text refers to a practice of filling out a March Madness bracket, predicting a winner for each game up to the championship. A bracket is "busted" when the result of a game is not as predicted; because future matchups depend on previous results, the whole bracket is worthless at that point. Randall "had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final", predicting both parties would win all previous rounds and advance to the final game/case. Because Connecticut lost its first-round case to Griswold, his bracket is busted in the first round.<br />
<br />
In the second part of the title text, Randall writes: "I had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final, probably in a case over who gets to annex Rhode Island." In fact, there actually was a Supreme Court case ''Massachusetts v. Connecticut'' (summary at [https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/282/660/ Justia.com], full text at [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17012735467934830012&q=Connecticut+v.+Massachusetts&hl=en&as_sdt=2006 Google Scholar]) dealing with water rights on the Connecticut River, which flows between the two states.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
:[A tournament bracket tree is shown with 16 participants each on the left and right side. From both sides toward the middle the brackets reduce to eight, then four, two, and one line where the latter join to a rectangle in the middle.]<br />
<br />
:[Left side:]<br />
:Marbury - Madison<br />
:McCulloch - Maryland<br />
:Gibbons - Ogden<br />
:Near - Minnesota<br />
:NLRB - Jones & Laughlin<br />
:Brown - Board of Education<br />
:Gideon - Wainwright<br />
:Griswold - Connecticut<br />
<br />
:[Right side:]<br />
:Miranda - Arizona<br />
:Loving - Virginia<br />
:Roe - Wade<br />
:United States - Nixon<br />
:Bush - Gore<br />
:Lawrence - Texas<br />
:Massachusetts - Environmental Protection Agency<br />
:Obergefell - Hodges<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the frame:]<br />
:Now that we've finished the round of 32, the Supreme court will be moving on to the Sweet 16.<br />
<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}</div>3Todd