April 1st Washington DC. The Commerce Clause of the US Constitution reared its ugly head again today as the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case of Scalia v Ginsberg on the constitutionality of the US Constitution. The case was brought before the court by Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia who charged Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg with abusing the US Constitution to determine the constitutionality of cases brought before the Court. At question is whether the US Constitution violates the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.
In preliminary hearings Justice Scalia, a vigorous defender of the right of citizens to not eat broccoli and a self-avowed broccoli hater, likened the Constitution's intrusions into interstate commerce to being forced to eat broccoli every day. Scalia argued that because broccoli was transported across state lines that it came under federal jurisdiction, and that because broccoli was malodorous and mephitic, the constitution was unconstitutional in allowing such a gustatory abomination on the nation.
Justice Ginsberg countered that broccoli was a sublime vegetable, robust in flavor and endowed with a bounty of essential nutrients and fiber. Her words appeared to fall of deaf palates on the court.
When asked if he would recuse himself from deliberations on the case in light of him being the plaintiff Justice Scalia was quoted as saying "I'd rather eat broccoli!"