Judge Posner Gives the 'Gifties' an Appellate Wedgie
A detailed excerpt, plus a link to the full opinion, can be accessed here (via How Appealing). Money quote:
[T]he picture and the few words imprinted on the Brandt T-shirt are no more expressive of an idea or opinion that the First Amendment might be thought to protect than a young child's talentless infantile drawing which Brandt's design successfully mimics. Otherwise every T-shirt that was not all white with no design or words... would be protected by the First Amendment, and schools could not impose dress codes or require uniforms without violating the free speech of the students, a proposition sensibly rejected in the Blau case.
"[T]alentless infantile drawing"? Judge Posner, that was way harsh.
You had to rule against the plaintiffs based on the caselaw; fine. But did you really have to insult their artistic abilities? Kids are like district judges: their feelings are easily hurt.
(If you're not familiar with this bizarre but amusing litigation, read our earlier post, available here.)
Rulings of Note from the Seventh Circuit [How Appealing]
Earlier: Lawsuit of the Day: Gifties v. Tards












Comments
Yikes.
Does this mean Daddy Pose has something against his students wearing "law review" t-shirts to his Greenberg dinners?
Posted by: Chicago grad | February 20, 2007 02:55 PM
This is some serious bullcrap. Under the First Amendment, Posner gets to decide what is and what is not protected expression? Whatever.
Posted by: anon | February 20, 2007 04:04 PM
Yes 4:04. It's the common law system.
Posted by: anonymous | February 20, 2007 04:10 PM
If you're going to read the opinion, don't fall asleep before getting to the drawing at the end! It'd look sweet at the top of this post next to Posner.
Posted by: anon | February 20, 2007 04:16 PM
Is it just me, or is the link to the opinion not working for anyone else?
Posted by: anon | February 20, 2007 04:18 PM
4:18 PM: Worked for me, but took FOREVER to load.
Posted by: Anonymous | February 20, 2007 04:34 PM