Our Newest Justice, After These Messages
Here are two facts that seem, on their face, unrelated: 1. Barack Obama is about to choose John Paul Stevens' replacement on the Supreme Court. 2. "American Idol" is still the top rated show in America.
I think you see where I'm going with this: Stevens should beat Simon Cowell to death with his gavel.
If that's not practical, we could hold open auditions and let viewers at home decide who advances to the Supreme Court, under the theory we couldn't do much worse than the current justices.
And I don't mean just for the Stevens vacancy. Unlike the rest of us, members of the Supreme Court aren't getting any younger. Justice morality is a serious topic that would also make an excellent name for a Bond girl. Consider this quote from U.S. Senator Jim Bunning, who told reporters – I swear he really said this – "Ruth Bader Ginsburg… has cancer… nine months is the longest anyone [with that kind of cancer] would live."
Of course Bunning later insisted he didn't mean to say this. At least, not in February, 2009, because 14 months later Ginsburg is still alive and well. But the important thing is, a number of justices could die in the near future, even if it'd be a few years before they'd have less brain functionality than Jim Bunning. That's why it's imperative we have a plan for replacing them.
I admit that the Constitution lays out a system for this, but it's clearly broken. Here I quote directly from Article III, Section 1, word five: "the." Also, from Article VIII, Section 4: "The President shall nominate some weenie judge nobody has ever heard of, and the senate shall hold hearings into whether said nominee has ever done anything more controversial than rolling through a stop sign." Consider the reasons the Senate rejected key nominees from the past 25 years:
Harriet Miers (2005): Thought George W. Bush was a good president
Douglas Ginsburg (1987): While smoking marijuana with his Harvard law students, drooled too much on the joint
Robert Bork (1987): Admitted, under oath, that he held personal opinions
So the old system is flawed. This brings me to my second point: "American Idol" is still tops in the ratings, despite being the exact same show it was when it debuted eight years ago.
Oh, sure, they replaced Paula Abdul with Ellen DeGeneres, and one of the contestants this season was named "Siobhan." But it's not enough to make the show relevant again. You can ask any of the losers, who can't handle the music industry after their seasons end. It's something I think about every time Justin Guarini squeegees my windshield.
That's why this is the perfect time for "Idol" to switch its format from music to law. The process would start with the early rounds, wherein over-eager Supreme Court hopefuls – the ones who give truly awful, over-the-top interpretations of the due process clause – have their lifelong dreams shattered for our amusement. "I'm just not buying your argument for standard of review, and your use of the rational basis test was just awful," Simon Cowell would tell these people, as they bawled their eyes out.
After that the show would present the top dozen contestants, and every week they'd offer their own concurring or dissenting opinions on classic Supreme Court cases. Here I'd suggest theme episodes: one week would be abortion decisions, the next free speech, the next power ballads, etc.
Ultimately the public would vote until only one contestant remained. Namely, the hottest one. If you think this is a bad way to choose our nation's top jurists, you have obviously never taken a gander at Antonin Scalia, who is less attractive than most species of beetle larvae.
I urge Congress to hurry and make this the official plan, before Obama names Stevens' replacement. It'll get the public interested in the judicial system, and justices might finally get in touch with how average Americans think. Plus it'll be the perfect lead-in for my next smash hit, "Is Jim Bunning Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?"
Scott Green is an award-winning humor columnist who has written regularly for the Washington Post and CBSNews.com. In 2009 he was named one of the top 100 young journalists in America, and now shares his thoughts on pop culture, politics, sex and relationships at ScottSays.com. He lives in Chicago with his fiancée and their two TVs, ages 4 and 3.