Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    11,242

    The Lord Justice Hath Ruled: Pringles Are Potato Chips

    June 1, 2009
    Editorial Observer
    The Lord Justice Hath Ruled: Pringles Are Potato Chips
    By ADAM COHEN
    Britain’s Supreme Court of Judicature has answered a question that has long puzzled late-night dorm-room snackers: What, exactly, is a Pringle? With citations ranging from Baroness Hale of Richmond to Oliver Wendell Holmes, Lord Justice Robin Jacob concluded that, legally, it is a potato chip.

    The decision is bad news for Procter & Gamble U.K., which now owes $160 million in taxes. It is good news for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs — and for fans of no-nonsense legal opinions. It is also a reminder, as conservatives begin attacking Judge Sonia Sotomayor for not being a “strict constructionist,â€
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #2
    Senior Member 4thHorseman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Gulf Coast
    Posts
    1,003
    n the end, as Lord Justice Jacob noted, a judge can only look at the relevant factors and draw an overall impression. His common-sense approach was a rebuke not only to Procter & Gamble, but to everyone out there who insists that the only way to read laws correctly is to read them strictly.
    Marvelous. Super. This is exactly the kind of logic that has led the courts to say that the Constitution requires US taxpayers to pay for emergency room visits for illegal aliens even when there is no medical emergency; babies born to illegal aliens while on US soil are automatically US citizens; and late term abortions are not really infanticide, they are a woman's right to privacy and to choose.
    "We have met the enemy, and they is us." - POGO

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    11,242
    Interesting, 4thHorseman. And to continue with the potato analogy, apparently this justice likes his crisps from another company. Personally, I prefer Pringles, which are not as greasy and salty as some brands, so I would have ruled the other way. In essence, there is no way to remove human preferences and prejudices from the way judges would interpret law.
    It is now up to the Senate to determine if Sotomayor's preferences and prejudices are such that she could rule against any potato chip made from a potato without the tan colored skin which happened to be grown in a Spanish-speaking country. And of course, political bias will have absolutely nothing to do with this--yeah, right.
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •