Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Law Students Blogs -> Thanks, But No Thanks.

Law Students

: Thanks, But No Thanks.

At least at the zoo, the monkeys get a treat.

This is a basic summary of what happens in my Statutory Interpretation class, populated mostly by gunners, assholes, idiots, and me (on any given day, I am some combination of the 3):

Child Genius: So, like, the law is ambiguous. And that's like, weird or something. What should we do?
That Kid Who Is Making The Rest of Law Review Look Bad: Tautology! Philology! I brought a thesaurus!
One of Two Reasonable People in the Room: Yes, let's explore that...wait, what are you talking about?
That Kid: Oh. Well, I will read selections from the reading out loud to you, very slowly, and see if I can make a point that sticks. Ready? Can you see it now? I will use my 'lecturing the idiots' tone in case you think that I am maybe full of crap.
The other one of Two Reasonable People in the Room: Um, but what about this perfectly reasonable point that I will point out to you?
That Kid: Well. I didn't read the case that closely. But that seems wrong.

Child Genius: Guys. I just totally noticed something. It's like, some people say "vehicle" and they mean "truck," and some people mean "car" and so language is like, ambiguous. Weird.

Bleeding Heart Liberal: But think of the people without a voice! We can't trust judges! I am having a thought, so I will shout it! I am not concerned about connecting with what is going on in class! I love the sound of my own voice! I have a feeling! And also, we don't know what laws mean. Who decides what they mean? And how?
Cold Hearted Conservative: But they don't pay taxes! Also, no, we can't trust judges! Or voters! I have a feeling, too! I will shout about my feelings so that I cannot hear your feelings! Shouting is fun! My voice is neat! Let's call each other naive and hypocritical, and see who snaps first! The law! Yeah! Who decides what it all means?

That Kid's Idiot Twin Brother: I have no need of statutory interpretation. I am inherently right. Therefore, I shall repeat my ideas loudly, and use increasingly absurd hyperbole, in order to show how right I am. In the event that you do not see my rightness immediately, I will either stare intently at you until you get it, or repeat the inane thing I said very, very slowly, so that you can see my rightness. Then I shall make quizzical and bemused faces at you until, astounded and befuddled by my contortions, you give up and come to terms with my rightness.

Child Genius: Holy Cow. Guys. I just heard. Language: it's like, ambiguous or something. I have an idea! Let's all sit around in a circle and talk about that. Because I think that somehow, somewhere, someone has not repeated this idea, and it is important that we repeat this over and over again, until its very, very clear. Unambiguous even.

Me: Holy mother of Wittgenstein, I hate all of you.

So yes, Mom, school is going great and I'm making lots of friends.

Full post as published by Thanks, But No Thanks. on February 09, 2010 (boomark / email).