+
upworthy
Democracy

The Onion filed a Supreme Court brief. It's both hilariously serious and seriously hilarious.

Who else could call the judiciary 'total Latin dorks' while making a legitimate point?

the onion supreme court

The Onion's Supreme Court brief uses parody to defend parody.

Political satire and parody have been around for at least 2,400 years, as ancient Greek playwright Aristophanes satirized the way Athenian leaders conducted the Peloponnesian War and parodied the dramatic styles of his contemporaries, Aeschylus and Euripides.

Satire and parody are used to poke fun and highlight issues, using mimicry and sarcasm to create comedic biting commentary. No modern outlet has been more prolific on this front than The Onion, and the popular satirical news site is defending parody as a vital free speech issue in a legal filing with the U.S. Supreme Court.

The filing is, as one might expect from The Onion, as brilliantly hilarious as it is serious, using the same satirical style it's defending in the crafting of the brief itself.


The Onion filed its amicus brief in support of Anthony Novak, a man who was arrested for and prosecuted for parodying the Parma, Ohio, police department on Facebook. Citing a law against disrupting police operations, the police searched Novak's apartment, seized his electronics and put him in jail, where he spent four days before making bail. After a jury acquitted him of all criminal charges, he subsequently filed a civil lawsuit against the police for violating his First and Fourth Amendment rights. However, a federal appeals court threw out the lawsuit, ruling that the officers had "qualified immunity," which protects government officials from being sued for unconstitutional infringements.

The Onion is petitioning for a writ of certiorari, asking the Supreme Court to review the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals' decision to toss out Novak's civil rights suit. As NPR points out, one primary question in this case is whether people reasonably believed Novak's Facebook page, which used the department's real name and photo but had a satirical slogan ("We no crime."), to be the department's real page.

The Onion argues that such ambiguity and potential confusion is exactly the point of parody. But the way the argument is made—using satire and parody to defend satire and parody—is making headlines.

The 23-page amicus brief can be read in full here, but let's look at some of the highlights:

First, the description of The Onion itself:

"The Onion is the world’s leading news publication, offering highly acclaimed, universally revered coverage of breaking national, international, and local news events. Rising from its humble beginnings as a print newspaper in 1756, The Onion now enjoys a daily readership of 4.3 trillion and has grown into the single most powerful and influential organization in human history.

"In addition to maintaining a towering standard of excellence to which the rest of the industry aspires, The Onion supports more than 350,000 full- and parttime journalism jobs in its numerous news bureaus and manual labor camps stationed around the world, and members of its editorial board have served with distinction in an advisory capacity for such nations as China, Syria, Somalia, and the former Soviet Union. On top of its journalistic pursuits, The Onion also owns and operates the majority of the world’s transoceanic shipping lanes, stands on the nation’s leading edge on matters of deforestation and strip mining, and proudly conducts tests on millions of animals daily."

It's clear to a reasonable mind that they're not being serious here. And yet, this description is being filed in a real Supreme Court filing, setting the stage for the entire argument of how parody works.

"Put simply, for parody to work, it has to plausibly mimic the original," the brief states. "The Sixth Circuit’s decision in this case would condition the First Amendment’s protection for parody upon a requirement that parodists explicitly say, up-front, that their work is nothing more than an elaborate fiction. But that would strip parody of the very thing that makes it function. The Onion cannot stand idly by in the face of a ruling that threatens to disembowel a form of rhetoric that has existed for millennia, that is particularly potent in the realm of political debate, and that, purely incidentally, forms the basis of The Onion’s writers’ paychecks."

The writer of the brief clearly wasn't going to let the opportunity to demonstrate the comedic nature of satire to pass simply because this was an actual legal document being filed before the highest court in the land, nor was he going to spare the judiciary from being the object of said comedy.

It took some gumption to write this paragraph, but oh gracious is it perfection. While arguing that parody functions by tricking people into thinking it's real, the brief states:

"Tu stultus es. You are dumb. These three Latin words have been The Onion’s motto and guiding light since it was founded in 1988 as America’s Finest News Source, leading its writers toward the paper’s singular purpose of pointing out that its readers are deeply gullible people. The Onion’s motto is central to this brief for two important reasons. First, it’s Latin. And The Onion knows that the federal judiciary is staffed entirely by total Latin dorks: They quote Catullus in the original Latin in chambers. They sweetly whisper 'stare decisis' into their spouses’ ears. They mutter 'cui bono' under their breath while picking up after their neighbors’ dogs. So The Onion knew that, unless it pointed to a suitably Latin rallying cry, its brief would be operating far outside the Court’s vernacular."

Just jaw-droppingly irreverent, and yet immediately following is a totally cogent and reasoned argument about the nature of parody, complete with citations and footnotes:

"The second reason—perhaps mildly more important—is that the phrase 'you are dumb' captures the very heart of parody: tricking readers into believing that they’re seeing a serious rendering of some specific form—a pop song lyric, a newspaper article, a police beat—and then allowing them to laugh at their own gullibility when they realize that they’ve fallen victim to one of the oldest tricks in the history of rhetoric. See San Francisco Bay Guardian, Inc. v. Super. Ct., 21 Cal. Rptr. 2d 464, 466 (Ct. App. 1993) ('[T]he very nature of parody . . . is to catch the reader off guard at first glance, after which the ‘victim’ recognizes that the joke is on him to the extent that it caught him unaware.').

"It really is an old trick. The word 'parody' stretches back to the Hellenic world. It originates in the prefix para, meaning an alteration, and the suffix ode, referring to the poetry form known as an ode.3 One of its earliest practitioners was the first-century B.C. poet Horace, whose Satires would replicate the exact form known as an ode—mimicking its meter, its subject matter, even its self-serious tone—but tweaking it ever so slightly so that the form was able to mock its own idiocies."

The brief is a brilliant defense of parody wrapped up in perfect parodic packaging, which is even pointed out in the arguments to drive home the point, as on page 15:

"This is the fifteenth page of a convoluted legal filing intended to deconstruct the societal implications of parody, so the reader’s attention is almost certainly wandering. That’s understandable. So here is a paragraph of gripping legal analysis to ensure that every jurist who reads this brief is appropriately impressed by the logic of its argument and the lucidity of its prose: Bona vacantia. De bonis asportatis. Writ of certiorari. De minimis. Jus accrescendi. Forum non conveniens. Corpus juris. Ad hominem tu quoque. Post hoc ergo propter hoc. Quod est demonstrandum. Actus reus. Scandalum magnatum. Pactum reservati dominii.

"See what happened? This brief itself went from a discussion of parody’s function—and the quite serious historical and legal arguments in favor of strong protections for parodic speech—to a curveball mocking the way legalese can be both impenetrably boring and belie the hollowness of a legal position. That’s the setup and punchline idea again. It would not have worked quite as well if this brief had said the following: 'Hello there, reader, we are about to write an amicus brief about the value of parody. Buckle up, because we’re going to be doing some fairly outré things, including commenting on this text’s form itself!' Taking the latter route would have spoiled the joke and come off as more than a bit stodgy. But more importantly, it would have disarmed the power that comes with a form devouring itself. For millennia, this has been the rhythm of parody: The author convinces the readers that they’re reading the real thing, then pulls the rug out from under them with the joke. The heart of this form lies in that give and take between the serious setup and the ridiculous punchline."

The Onion has outdone itself many times, but this amicus brief may be its best work yet right up to the end.

"The Onion intends to continue its socially valuable role bringing the disinfectant of sunlight into the halls of power…," the argument section concludes. "And it would vastly prefer that sunlight not to be measured out to its writers in 15- minute increments in an exercise yard."

Definitely give the full brief a read. You'll certainly never read another Supreme Court filing like it.

True

Larissa Gummy was first introduced to the work of the Peace Corps in high school. All it took was seeing a few photos shared by her ninth-grade teacher, a returned Peace Corps Volunteer, to know that one day, she would follow in those footsteps.

This inspiration eventually led Larissa away from her home in Minnesota to Rwanda in East Africa, to give back to her family’s country of origin and pursue her passion for international development. Though her decision confused her parents at first, they’re now proud and excited to see what their daughter has accomplished through her volunteer work.

And just what was that work? Well, it changed from day to day, but it all had to do with health.

Mostly, Larissa worked for Rwanda’s First 1,000 Days Health project, which aims to improve the conditions that affect the mortality rate of kids within the first 1,000 days of being born (or almost three years old). These conditions include hygiene, nutrition, and prevention of childhood diseases like malaria and acute respiratory infections (ARI). Addressing malnutrition was a particular focus, as it continues to cause stunted growth in 33% of Rwandan children under the age of five.

In partnership with the local health center, Larissa helped with vaccination education, led nutrition classes, offered prenatal care to expecting mothers, and helped support health education in surrounding communities. Needless to say—she stayed busy with a variety of tasks.

Keep ReadingShow less
Family

Dad takes 7-week paternity leave after his second child is born and is stunned by the results

"These past seven weeks really opened up my eyes on how the household has actually ran, and 110% of that is because of my wife."

@ustheremingtons/TikTok

There's a lot to be gleaned from this.

Participating in paternity leave offers fathers so much more than an opportunity to bond with their new kids. It also allows them to help around the house and take on domestic responsibilities that many new mothers have to face alone…while also tending to a newborn.

All in all, it enables couples to handle the daunting new chapter as a team, making it less stressful on both parties. Or at least equally stressful on both parties. Democracy!

TikTok creator and dad Caleb Remington, from the popular account @ustheremingtons, confesses that for baby number one, he wasn’t able to take a “single day of paternity leave.”

This time around, for baby number two, Remington had the privilege of taking seven weeks off (to be clear—his employer offered four weeks, and he used an additional three weeks of PTO).

The time off changed Remington’s entire outlook on parenting, and his insights are something all parents could probably use.

Keep ReadingShow less

Writer Alan Moore speaking in London.

Alan Moore, 69, is a legendary comic book writer best known for “Watchmen,” “V for Vendetta,” “The Ballad of Halo Jones,” “Swamp Thing,” "Batman: The Killing Joke” and "From Hell."

Moore is known as one of the best comic book writers in the English language, and his advice for fellow scribes is a bit counterintuitive. He believes that it’s as important to read "terrible" books as it is classic literature.

Keep ReadingShow less

Conan O'Brien speaks with Danny Masterson in 2004.

Danny Masterson, best known for playing Steven Hyde on “That ‘70s Show” from 1998 to 2006, was sentenced to 30 years in prison on Thursday, September 7, for raping two women during the height of his fame. Throughout the trial, prosecutors argued that the Church of Scientology helped cover up the assaults—an allegation the organization denied.

After Masterson’s sentencing, footage of an uncomfortable 2004 exchange with former late-night host Conan O’Brien went viral on X, formerly Twitter. During the exchange, O’Brien tells Masterson that he will pay for his behavior one day.

Keep ReadingShow less
Identity

Hank Azaria shares how he flipped 180 degrees on his voicing of Apu on 'The Simpsons'

The actor went from defending his portrayal of the Indian shopkeeper to founding an anti-bias non-profit to share why it was wrong.

Hank Azaria spoke with The Man Enough Podcast about his evolution with the character Apu.

Hank Azaria has starred in dozens of TV shows and movies, both as a full-bodied actor and as a voiceover artist. But the roles he's best known for are the multiple characters he has voiced on "The Simpsons."

One of those voices helped win Azaria multiple Emmy awards, but also landed him in hot water—his portrayal of Indian shopkeeper Apu Nahasapeemapetilon.

A documentary by Indian comedian Hari Kondabolu, "The Problem with Apu," examined the issue of Apu being a racialized stereotype, no matter how beloved the character was. Kondabolu himself started of as a fan of the character. "Apu was the only Indian we had on TV at all so I was happy for any representation as a kid," he told the BBC. But that perspective changed as he got older. "He's funny, but that doesn't mean this representation is accurate or right or righteous," he said. "It gets to the insidiousness of racism, though, because you don't even notice it when it's right in front of you."

Azaria spoke to his own obliviousness and his years-long journey from defending his portrayal of Apu to co-founding an anti-bias non-profit aimed at educating people about why such portrayals are harmful on The Man Enough podcast.

Keep ReadingShow less
Health

Depression or bipolar disorder? A psychiatrist lists five signs it's likely not depression.

Bipolar disorder is more likely to present in the late teens, but signs are easy to miss.

Psychiatrist lists 5 signs your depression is likely bipolar disorder.

It's not always easy to figure out what mental health condition you have, even after being diagnosed. Sometimes questions pop up after a diagnosis or new symptoms appear that may give you pause. One of the mental health conditions most questioned is bipolar disorder because it seems to contain a lot of symptoms that can overlap with other disorders, especially depression.

Bipolar disorder is characterized broadly by experiencing cycles of depression and mania. Depression symptoms can be so deep that it seems insurmountable and the mania symptoms can be so extreme that people impulsively take a cross-country trip without packing a thing. But since there's typically a much smaller swing between the two poles, some people may question if their depression is actually undiagnosed bipolar disorder.

Tracey Marks, an Atlanta-based psychiatrist, is helping people learn the difference between depression and bipolar disorder and how to tell if it's likely the latter.

Keep ReadingShow less
Joy

10 things that made us smile this week

Upworthy's weekly roundup of joy

Babies and doggos bringing the smiles

If any animal embodies the simple joy of our "10 things that made us smile" series, it's gotta be a Golden Retriever. This week's list includes not one but two Golden good boys being their playful, hilarious selves. We've also got a sweet floofy puppers and a story about tiny dogs that is certainly smile-worthy. (Doggos for the win!)

And babies! Gracious, do we have a couple of adorable babies this week. Wait till you see the "Oh No" dance. Serious cuteness overload.

Also, have you ever seen a duck being tossed into a kiddie pool over and over because it just can't get enough? You will, and your day will be all the better for it.

Enjoy all this and more in this week's roundup:

Keep ReadingShow less