Disclaimer: Please read with caution. This article is meant to be a satire. The opinions expressed in this article do not reflect the author’s or TRBC’s feelings toward or position on anything to do with the Supreme Court, double doors, or Ruth Bader Ginsberg.
In the most significant ruling since the passing of Justice Scalia, the Supreme Court said this week that it was split on whether universities should be held accountable for students’ stupidity. Split decisions have become commonplace in the Nation’s highest court as only eight justices sit on the bench. The decision is a huge win for people who like squeezing through small doorways and being late.
The hot button issue case regarding the disorganized entry and exit from academic buildings was brought before the court by Mary Smith, a junior at Boston College and self-proclaimed “voice of the people.”
Smith’s problems with the university arose last fall when she claims the general lack of common sense on behalf of her fellow students caused her to miss a pop-quiz that she had “spent all night preparing for.”
Smith says she chose schoolwork over a popular bar outing on Thirsty Thursday, a popular college tradition where students consume alcoholic beverages and visit local bars, which led to her being “extremely over-prepared” for her classes the following Friday. “I would have aced that quiz, and it’s the school’s fault I didn’t get to” Martin asserted after hearing the decision.
Smith blamed the crowd of people funneling through only the right side of the double doors of Stokes Hall for her arrival 15 minutes after the start of class. “One person from inside the building would exit and then one person from outside the building would enter,” remarked Smith. She asserts that this massive inefficiency causes students to be late to class everyday and it is a result of Boston College’s failure to teach students how to properly use double doors.
At oral arguments, there was a clear division among the court. Reports from inside the court state that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg stood up and proclaimed the justice behind Miss Smith’s cause, which prompted a subsequent eye-roll from Justice Clarence Thomas.
Smith, a political science major, argued that the lack of action by the University violates her Ninth Amendment rights. The Ninth Amendment defends any rights not already included in The Constitution; Smith thinks her “right to be punctual” is one of these omitted rights.
The 20 year old sought a ruling that would require the university to compensate her for her Thirsty Thursday absence. Smith said she demanded Boston College give her free tuition “or something.”
The Court’s split decision resulted in an affirmation of the Lower Courts’ decision that this issue was a waste of time. Smith refuses to stop her campaign for “Double Door Reform,” insisting that her fight will continue until students use “the left door for exit and the right door for entry.”