Talk:2037: Supreme Court Bracket - Revision history

172.70.110.237 at 07:04, 10 January 2023

2023-01-10T07:04:48Z

Dextrous Fred: Adding one more comment

2022-09-19T03:10:58Z

Adding one more comment

162.158.78.172 at 14:05, 20 December 2018

2018-12-20T14:05:20Z

162.158.78.172 at 14:03, 20 December 2018

2018-12-20T14:03:53Z

Dgbrt at 19:23, 23 October 2018

2018-10-23T19:23:37Z

Dgbrt at 19:23, 23 October 2018

2018-10-23T19:23:11Z

162.158.106.66 at 05:03, 23 October 2018

2018-10-23T05:03:48Z

162.158.106.66 at 05:02, 23 October 2018

2018-10-23T05:02:11Z

NiceGuy1 at 12:40, 31 August 2018

2018-08-31T12:40:06Z

NiceGuy1 at 12:38, 31 August 2018

2018-08-31T12:38:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:04, 10 January 2023
Line 58:		Line 58:
	Is it worth mentioning that Row v Wade is not the binding precedent on abortion laws anymore (and hasn't been since Planned Parenthood v Casey in 1992)? To the best of my knowledge, its the only case in the bracket that is no longer precedent.14:05, 20 December 2018 (UTC)		Is it worth mentioning that Row v Wade is not the binding precedent on abortion laws anymore (and hasn't been since Planned Parenthood v Casey in 1992)? To the best of my knowledge, its the only case in the bracket that is no longer precedent.14:05, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
	:It's 2022 and Roe v Wade is not the binding precedent for a wholly different reason (not sure if the explanation needs an update but it's certainly a development that was unforeseen when the comic was made...)		:It's 2022 and Roe v Wade is not the binding precedent for a wholly different reason (not sure if the explanation needs an update but it's certainly a development that was unforeseen when the comic was made...)
		+
		+
		+	hi, i think this comic predicted the united states overturning roe vs wade.....

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:10, 19 September 2022
Line 57:		Line 57:

	Is it worth mentioning that Row v Wade is not the binding precedent on abortion laws anymore (and hasn't been since Planned Parenthood v Casey in 1992)? To the best of my knowledge, its the only case in the bracket that is no longer precedent.14:05, 20 December 2018 (UTC)		Is it worth mentioning that Row v Wade is not the binding precedent on abortion laws anymore (and hasn't been since Planned Parenthood v Casey in 1992)? To the best of my knowledge, its the only case in the bracket that is no longer precedent.14:05, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
		+	:It's 2022 and Roe v Wade is not the binding precedent for a wholly different reason (not sure if the explanation needs an update but it's certainly a development that was unforeseen when the comic was made...)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:05, 20 December 2018
Line 56:		Line 56:
	:Thanks for your work. I've removed the incomplete tag. --[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 19:23, 23 October 2018 (UTC)		:Thanks for your work. I've removed the incomplete tag. --[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 19:23, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

−	Is it worth mentioning that Row v Wade is not the binding precedent on abortion laws anymore (and hasn't been since Planned Parenthood v Casey in 1992)? To the best of my knowledge, its the only case in the bracket that is no longer precedent.	+	Is it worth mentioning that Row v Wade is not the binding precedent on abortion laws anymore (and hasn't been since Planned Parenthood v Casey in 1992)? To the best of my knowledge, its the only case in the bracket that is no longer precedent.14:05, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:03, 20 December 2018
Line 55:		Line 55:
	I've added in the last explanations for the court cases; the description in the "incomplete" template would seem to suggest that said template should be removed. Do y'all concur? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.66\|162.158.106.66]] 05:03, 23 October 2018 (UTC)		I've added in the last explanations for the court cases; the description in the "incomplete" template would seem to suggest that said template should be removed. Do y'all concur? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.66\|162.158.106.66]] 05:03, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
	:Thanks for your work. I've removed the incomplete tag. --[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 19:23, 23 October 2018 (UTC)		:Thanks for your work. I've removed the incomplete tag. --[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 19:23, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
		+
		+	Is it worth mentioning that Row v Wade is not the binding precedent on abortion laws anymore (and hasn't been since Planned Parenthood v Casey in 1992)? To the best of my knowledge, its the only case in the bracket that is no longer precedent.

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:23, 23 October 2018
Line 54:		Line 54:

	I've added in the last explanations for the court cases; the description in the "incomplete" template would seem to suggest that said template should be removed. Do y'all concur? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.66\|162.158.106.66]] 05:03, 23 October 2018 (UTC)		I've added in the last explanations for the court cases; the description in the "incomplete" template would seem to suggest that said template should be removed. Do y'all concur? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.66\|162.158.106.66]] 05:03, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
−	:Thanks for ~~you~~ work. I've removed the incomplete tag. --[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 19:23, 23 October 2018 (UTC)	+	:Thanks for your work. I've removed the incomplete tag. --[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 19:23, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:03, 23 October 2018
Line 53:		Line 53:
	:I'm not a lawyer but simple logic tells me that you are over-interpreting the comic. When reading the still not complete explanation you can see the cases are ordered chronological. This means the cases at the nearby brackets are only connected within a small time frame. As one example look at the bracket ''Bush v. Gore'' (2000 Presidential election) and ''Lawrence v. Texas'' (sodomy laws, same-sex sexual activity); I can't see any further meanings at that bracket. --[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 21:41, 28 August 2018 (UTC)		:I'm not a lawyer but simple logic tells me that you are over-interpreting the comic. When reading the still not complete explanation you can see the cases are ordered chronological. This means the cases at the nearby brackets are only connected within a small time frame. As one example look at the bracket ''Bush v. Gore'' (2000 Presidential election) and ''Lawrence v. Texas'' (sodomy laws, same-sex sexual activity); I can't see any further meanings at that bracket. --[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 21:41, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

−	I've added in the last explanations for the court cases; the description in the "incomplete" template would seem to suggest that said template should be removed. Do y'all concur?	+	I've added in the last explanations for the court cases; the description in the "incomplete" template would seem to suggest that said template should be removed. Do y'all concur? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.66\|162.158.106.66]] 05:03, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:02, 23 October 2018
Line 52:		Line 52:
	I think there's more to this than the current description suggests. These cases are precedents which all currently exist alongside each other but which could, theoretically (but in the light of recent appointments, very possibly) be used to overrule each other in some way. If, as is widely feared, Roe v. Wade were to be overturned it would not be overturned in a vacuum but by a judgement based on another legal precedent. The point being made therefore is not that the claimants themselves are in competition (as the description notes, many are dead) but that the cases themselves are as precedents, none of which has any greater legal authority than any other. My knowledge of the minutiae of the cases themselves is not up to analysing whether there's particular reasoning behind the choices of which cases are in which brackets, but I'm sure there is insight and irony hidden here for someone with a better background in the law to uncover - lawyers needed![[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.21\|162.158.158.21]] 17:57, 28 August 2018 (UTC)		I think there's more to this than the current description suggests. These cases are precedents which all currently exist alongside each other but which could, theoretically (but in the light of recent appointments, very possibly) be used to overrule each other in some way. If, as is widely feared, Roe v. Wade were to be overturned it would not be overturned in a vacuum but by a judgement based on another legal precedent. The point being made therefore is not that the claimants themselves are in competition (as the description notes, many are dead) but that the cases themselves are as precedents, none of which has any greater legal authority than any other. My knowledge of the minutiae of the cases themselves is not up to analysing whether there's particular reasoning behind the choices of which cases are in which brackets, but I'm sure there is insight and irony hidden here for someone with a better background in the law to uncover - lawyers needed![[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.21\|162.158.158.21]] 17:57, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
	:I'm not a lawyer but simple logic tells me that you are over-interpreting the comic. When reading the still not complete explanation you can see the cases are ordered chronological. This means the cases at the nearby brackets are only connected within a small time frame. As one example look at the bracket ''Bush v. Gore'' (2000 Presidential election) and ''Lawrence v. Texas'' (sodomy laws, same-sex sexual activity); I can't see any further meanings at that bracket. --[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 21:41, 28 August 2018 (UTC)		:I'm not a lawyer but simple logic tells me that you are over-interpreting the comic. When reading the still not complete explanation you can see the cases are ordered chronological. This means the cases at the nearby brackets are only connected within a small time frame. As one example look at the bracket ''Bush v. Gore'' (2000 Presidential election) and ''Lawrence v. Texas'' (sodomy laws, same-sex sexual activity); I can't see any further meanings at that bracket. --[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 21:41, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
		+
		+	I've added in the last explanations for the court cases; the description in the "incomplete" template would seem to suggest that said template should be removed. Do y'all concur?

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 I created an image showing the winners superimposed on the original comic so you can see who is due to "play" each other next. Is there any way to upload the file? the image is this: http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:UploadStash/thumb/15zj3hymeul4.6wctza.13964.png/600px-15zj3hymeul4.6wctza.13964.png [[User:Mrdownes|Mrdownes]] ([[User talk:Mrdownes|talk]]) 11:27, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
 :In general we don't need such an image because it doesn't explain much and the winners are already highlighted at the explanation. This Wiki isn't a picture book. Nevertheless check the menu and you will find the entry "Upload file". --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:09, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
 :: I found it helpful in order to see who would play who in the next round. I couldn't upload the image because it said I didn't have permission to create a page. {{unsigned|Mrdownes}}
 :::Sorry, I didn't want to offend you. Even I get a stupid error message when clicking your link above. Nevertheless you only have to do a few edits or comments here until you automatically granted the rights for uploading files. So you are welcome to participate, if it is helpful or not will be decided by the community not only me or other admins. I've stated my opinion but that's only me. There is no censorship here. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:53, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 :I think that updated bracket image would be fun to see regardless. Please do post it. [[User:Wisnij|Wisnij]] ([[User talk:Wisnij|talk]]) 19:08, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 Came here for insight, only to discover this is tomorrow's comic, I'm viewing Friday's comic on Thursday after midnight. D'oh! Damn, seeing a comic early and I can't provide or contribute to the explanation, LOL! I realize the bracket and "Sweet 16" are sports things, I think football and/or basketball, and I spotted the famous name Roe vs. Wade, so seems like court cases, but that's it. Looking forward to people explaining the smaller jokes (I spotted "Loving" and "Virginia", and I feel like I recall their license plates say "Virginia Is For Lovers" I think, I expect something there). [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:58, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
 :Protip: Thursday after midnight is Friday! Nonetheless this comic was released at 0:00 EDT meaning it was still Thursday at time zones westwards. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 07:03, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
 :I got here at like 9:10 Pacific time and the comic was already up; normally I have to wait until like 1 AM before Randall posts it/you guys auto-mirror it.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.189.235|172.68.189.235]] 08:23, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
 ::The pages here are created automatically less than two minutes after the original was published on xkcd. Today, like some others in the recent past, this happened at 4:01 UTC (or GMT - the server time) which corresponds to 0:01 EDT (Randall time) and 21:01 PDT (the day before at your time.) The weekday is defined by Randall's time zone - US citizens should know about the shift from east to west. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:01, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
 Errm. You can go back to the previous comic if you hit the [<Prev] button just above the current one. {{unsigned ip|141.101.107.36}}
 I agree that this is a sports reference, but can someone also include some sort of note about the title? I think that the "Supreme COURT" is referring to a basketball COURT, connected to how brackets like this are used in basketball like with March Madness. [[User:B. A. Beder|B. A. Beder]] ([[User talk:B. A. Beder|talk]]) 05:50, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
@@ Line 12: / Line 14: @@
 ::Why not both? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.82|108.162.219.82]] 18:49, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
 :::There is an actual basketball court in the Supreme Court building: https://www.si.com/nba/2018/07/25/supreme-court-building-basketball-court [[User:Tplaza64|Tplaza64]] ([[User talk:Tplaza64|talk]]) 00:03, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
 Well, how would the tournament turn out? We know who won the cases, so who's the king of the US legal system? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.66|162.158.90.66]] 06:41, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
@@ Line 22: / Line 25: @@
 ::"Marbury won"? Not according to the unanimous 4-0 ruling AGAINST Marbury.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.140|172.69.22.140]] 20:20, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
 : As I see it (IANAL), the plaintiff goal in the Supreme Court usually is to change something (overrule a previous court decision, repeal a law), while the respondent typically fights to keep things the same. If the plaintiff loses, no changes are made. If nobody sees any changes in the country, why the case would be a landmark? Only when both outcomes change things for many people, like in the Dred Scott case, the respondent win makes a landmark. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.77.86|141.101.77.86]] 13:24, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
 I think this comic is unique because the comic references real life events without throwing in any fake events for comic effect. Usually the comic would have some imaginary events included. I guess just the idea that winners of Supreme Court cases are going to come back to the court and compete against each other is comical enough. [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 15:42, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
@@ Line 28: / Line 30: @@
 I created an image showing the winners superimposed on the original comic so you can see who is due to "play" each other next. Is there any way to upload the file? the image is this: http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:UploadStash/thumb/15zj3hymeul4.6wctza.13964.png/600px-15zj3hymeul4.6wctza.13964.png [[User:Mrdownes|Mrdownes]] ([[User talk:Mrdownes|talk]]) 11:27, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
 :In general we don't need such an image because it doesn't explain much and the winners are already highlighted at the explanation. This Wiki isn't a picture book. Nevertheless check the menu and you will find the entry "Upload file". --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:09, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
 :: I found it helpful in order to see who would play who in the next round. I couldn't upload the image because it said I didn't have permission to create a page. {{unsigned|Mrdownes}}
 :::Sorry, I didn't want to offend you. Even I get a stupid error message when clicking your link above. Nevertheless you only have to do a few edits or comments here until you automatically granted the rights for uploading files. So you are welcome to participate, if it is helpful or not will be decided by the community not only me or other admins. I've stated my opinion but that's only me. There is no censorship here. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:53, 27 August 2018 (UTC)