7th Circuit, Federal Judges

Judge Frank Easterbrook Has Had It With These Damn Rats

Setting a trap for the rats infesting his docket.

By  
on

animal 2Judge Frank Easterbrook is done with rats. And cats too, of a particular variety. Specifically, the legendary cheerleader for textualism and his panel colleagues, Chief Judge Diane Wood and Judge Richard Posner, have had it with this case about giant inflatable rats — and fat cats — and they kicked this case out of their courtroom like a scab crossing the line.

But not before some fancy word-smithing about the phenomenon of inflatable rodents.

As Casey C. Sullivan of FindLaw noted in his story about the opinion:

What entered the Seventh Circuit as a dispute over gray, pock-marked, grimacing, inflatable rats, exited a shining example of judicial writing. We could recite the background, but we’d not be able to do it justice. Instead, we’ll let Judge Easterbrook’s brilliant opening lines speak for themselves:

This case is about rats. Giant, inflatable rats, which unions use to demonstrate their unhappiness with employers that do not pay union-scale wages. Cats too — inflatable fat cats, wearing business suits and pinkie rings, strangling workers.

What imagery, what cadence, what judicious use of the sentence fragment.

The case, which was stupid in every conceivable way, revolved around the fact that the striking workers used stakes to secure the inflatable props, as opposed to ropes or placement in flatbed trucks. No, because of the stakes, the town considered the props to be “structures” and ordered them taken down. Judge Easterbrook loves him a good statute, but the farcical ones centered on distinctions without a difference don’t make good fodder for the textualism handbook. Thankfully, Judge Easterbrook had another out, and rather than get into the morass of whether or not these stakes really can be the magical distinction between a structure and a perfectly allowable sign — an inquiry into the meaning of text that would rankle Derrida — he tossed the matter on mootness given that the project at the center of the protest had since completed. No messy statutory interpretation needed!

Meanwhile, Judge Posner dissented from Judge Easterbrook’s reasoning, determining that the town had plainly violated the union’s First Amendment rights and that, much like real rats, if the court doesn’t address the issue now they’ll just come back. Alas, Posner did not win the day.

And so the good people of Wisconsin sit, without answers, and await the return of the rats. One of the drawbacks living as cheeseheads, I suppose.

Sponsored

(The full, rodent-filled opinion is available on the next page…)

This Is the Best Opinion About Inflatable Rats You’ll Ever Read [FindLaw]

Joe Patrice is an editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news.

Sponsored

1 2Next »

Topics

, , , , , , , , , , , ,