• news
  • MONDAY SEPTEMBER 24 2007 12:00 PM

Are You There, God? It’s Me, Ernie. I’ll See You in Court, Jerk



Many of you should be familiar with the classic American short story The Devil and Daniel Webster, where a satanic “Mr. Scratch” takes on famous lawyer Daniel Webster to court for the possession of a local New Hampshire farmer’s soul. It’s a fun bit of word-play and Faustian Americana, but it’s just a story. After all, you can’t really take the devil to court, can you?

Up until now the answer had been essentially “no,” per the famous federal district court opinion in Gerald Mayo v. Satan and his Staff, 54 FRD 282 (1971). There, a plaintiff filed a federal complaint against Satan for

[…]violation of his civil rights in forma pauperis. He alleges that Satan has on numerous occasions caused plaintiff misery and unwarranted threats, against the will of plaintiff, that Satan has placed deliberate obstacles in his path and has caused plaintiff's downfall. Plaintiff alleges that by reason of these acts Satan has deprived him of his constitutional rights.


The court, after some cheeky references to the Daniel Webster story, declined jurisdiction over Beelzebub, essentially saying that he was impossible to serve papers on. Basically, it’s a bit of technical law geekery, but it has some precedential value for courts to use to kick out subsequent suits aimed at the Lord of the Underworld.

But will the same logic apply if someone sues The Big Man Upstairs? Well, my friends, we’re about to find out. That’s right, Nebraska State Senator Ernie Chambers is taking the Almighty to Court.

The lawsuit accuses God "of making and continuing to make terroristic threats of grave harm to innumerable persons, including constituents of Plaintiff who Plaintiff has the duty to represent." It says God has caused "fearsome floods, egregious earthquakes, horrendous hurricanes, terrifying tornadoes, pestilential plagues, ferocious famines, devastating droughts, genocidal wars, birth defects and the like."

The suit also says God has caused "calamitous catastrophes resulting in the wide-spread death, destruction and terrorization of millions upon millions of the Earth’s inhabitants including innocent babes, infants, children, the aged and infirm without mercy or distinction."

Chambers also says God "has manifested neither compassion nor remorse, proclaiming that defendant will laugh" when calamity comes.
Chambers asks for the court to grant him a summary judgment. He said as an alternative, he wants the judge to set a date for a hearing as expeditiously as possible and enter a permanent injunction enjoining God from engaging in the types of deleterious actions and the making of terroristic threats described in the lawsuit.


Chambers, who is quite obviously a Democrat since he hates God, is not fucking around. He’s even made an argument to attempt to get around the jurisdictional issue that doomed the Mayo suit. In order to sue someone, you first have to show that the court you have filed the suit in has power over that person. That’s jurisdiction. One way that a court gains jurisdiction over a person is if that person has contacts (physical, financial, etc.) within that court’s state. Here, Chambers hopes to get around Mayo by arguing:

[…]that defendant, being omnipresent, is personally present in Douglas County.


Works for me, let’s get the show on the road, right? I suppose it’s worthwhile to note that the suit was filed as a symbolic protest and that Chambers, an agnostic, has no personal problems with He Who is Called I Am. While there are conflicting reports as to what exactly Chambers is protesting (some say Chambers is working to ensure that the courthouse gates stay open to all litigants and some say Chambers is upset at the filing of another lawsuit he considers frivolous), we’re pretty sure he’s not serious enough that he’s going to start dodging lightening bolts. Chambers, who describes himself as “left of San Francisco”, is the most liberal member of the Nebraska State Senate and has a long history of forceful and pointed legal chicanery.

Because of Chambers, the Legislature routinely backs bills its members wouldn’t otherwise have dreamed of supporting. He cajoled his colleagues into abolishing corporal punishment in schools, correcting the state pension system so that women would be treated equally with men, and backing a switch from at-large municipal elections to district-based voting so that nonwhites would have a chance to serve. Under his sway, Nebraska led the nation in the 1980s in divesting in companies that did business with apartheid-era South Africa. Every session he introduces a bill calling for an end to the death penalty. He once got the Legislature to approve it, but could not overcome the governor’s veto.
[…]
Chambers is famous for an unsurpassed knowledge of legislative rules, which he uses to derail bills that threaten those he calls the “downtrodden.” This attracts the criticism that he is “the great obstructionist,” better at halting legislation than creating laws. As one colleague observed, “In Washington they call it a filibuster. In Lincoln, they call it Ernie.” Once, Chambers filibustered on the state budget until his colleagues agreed to set aside half a million dollars for a minority scholarship fund. In the 2005 session, he blocked the legalization of concealed weapons, as well as a constitutional amendment protecting the right to hunt, which he said would “trivialize and pollute” the state constitution. In classic Ernie Chambers style, he introduced a raft of riders to the amendment that would protect such other rights as “creating, recreating, conversating and procreating,” “hunting for the link between Noah’s Ark, Joan of Arc and Archimedes,” and “sitting on the front porch on a warm summer evening, drinking a glass of cold lemonade, dreamily watching the silvery moon rise to begin its journey across a darkening velvet sky powdered with stardust.”


The Noah’s Ark line is genius. And, as soon as I can figure out what exactly this suit against Yahweh is protesting I’ll be ready to file this baby in the genius pile as well. I mean, Jehovah may be all-knowing and all-powerful, but my guess is that Johnny Cochrane doesn’t exactly live in His neighborhood. All the really good lawyers play for the other team, see. So it’ll be a slam dunk victory, right?

Not so fast. He’s gotten Hisself some reprazentation, yo.

Eric Perkins, an attorney in Corpus Christi, Texas, said Friday he filed a response to the lawsuit from Nebraska State Sen. Ernie Chambers. "It's kind of a turn on 'What would Jesus do?'" Perkins said. "I thought to myself, "what would God say?"

"Defendant denies that this or any court has jurisdiction ... over Him any more than the court has jurisdiction over the wind or rain, sunlight or darkness," according to Perkins' response.

As for Chambers' contention that God made terroristic threats, inspired fear and caused "widespread death, destruction and terrorization," Perkins wrote that God "contends that any harm or injury suffered is a direct and proximate result of mankind ignoring obvious warnings."


Your move, Ernie.

Subrosa would wish Senator Chambers good luck, but as a fellow agnostic he doesn’t really want to betray his rooting interest here. He’s sure the Distinguished Gentleman from the Cornhusker State will understand.


 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next

Comments
Azadeth

Azadeth

Fairport, NY
August 2006

SEP 24, 2007 12:23 PM

I don't care how good a lawyer you are, good luck defending God. That fucker's got a lot to answer for...everything to answer for, actually.

Archaneus

Archaneus

Kalamazoo, MI
October 2006

SEP 24, 2007 12:47 PM

This just gave me a hearty chuckle. I hope this was his way of making fun of the very idea of god, since it's such a defunct archaic concept, but I can't jump to that conclusion since I don't really know anything about the guy. Reading about his past on here, though, makes me like him a lot. It's nice to see a guy in politics who actually cares about those he represents and is passionate about doing what he can to help them. In any case, that would be great if this become the Scopes trial of our generation with the good guys(Ernie, because we all know that's not god) winning it.

unfiltrator

unfiltrator

San Francisco, CA
April 2004

SEP 24, 2007 01:11 PM

I wish this was a class action.

SockPuppet

SockPuppet

I'm lost
July 2006

SEP 24, 2007 01:51 PM

Archaneus said:
It's nice to see a guy in politics who actually cares about those he represents and is passionate about doing what he can to help them.



And funny with it. Sweet smile

ZombieVengence

ZombieVengence

Norfolk, VA
July 2004

SEP 24, 2007 01:55 PM

I saw this movie from Australia about a man who sued god for the destruction of his boat, I believe that is was called "The Man who Sued God"

Subrosa

Subrosa

San Francisco, CA
July 2004

SEP 24, 2007 01:58 PM

publicAnemone said:
I wish this was a class action.



They contemplated that in Mayo as well!

If such action were to be allowed we would also face the question of whether it may be maintained as a class action. It appears to meet the requirements of Fed.R. of Civ.P. 23 that the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable, there are questions of law and fact common to the class, and the claims of the representative party is typical of the claims of the class. We cannot now determine if the representative party will fairly protect the interests of the class.


Basically, it could be, but it would hinge on whether Ernie would represent all of our interests fairly.

Zarth

zarth

Seattle, WA
December 2004

SEP 24, 2007 02:07 PM

This pleases me.

meatpieboy

meatpieboy

Korea, D.P.R.
June 2004

SEP 24, 2007 02:33 PM

But... what would he get if he won? And more importantly how would they collect? And if God refused to comply, how would we enforce the ruling? And if we can't enforce rulings, what does that say about the rule of law?

SockPuppet

SockPuppet

I'm lost
July 2006

SEP 24, 2007 02:48 PM

magpieboy said:
But... what would he get if he won?



25d6 lightning bolt FTW...

BrotherHeathen

BrotherHeathen

Witter, AR
November 2006

SEP 24, 2007 02:56 PM

Why not just sue the Catholic Church? Isn't the Pope supposed to be God's representative on Earth?

Gerry_D

Gerry_D

Los Angeles, CA
May 2003

SEP 24, 2007 03:06 PM

publicAnemone said:
I wish this was a class action.



+1

Gerry_D

Gerry_D

Los Angeles, CA
May 2003

SEP 24, 2007 03:06 PM

hah good work

Tangus

Tangus

Chicago, IL
November 2005

SEP 24, 2007 03:08 PM

yeah, nice work Brosa.

I knew it was from you before I looked at the name. tongue

ENDDD

ENDDD

Citrus Heights, CA
March 2006

SEP 24, 2007 03:11 PM

Do these people take this seriously? No, really. What point are they trying to prove? Who would actually think that a case like that would actually make it to court?Fucking psychopaths!

Markus001

Markus001

United Kingdom
November 2004

SEP 24, 2007 03:17 PM

ZombieVengence said:
I saw this movie from Australia about a man who sued god for the destruction of his boat, I believe that is was called "The Man who Sued God"



It's a shame that film sucked donkey balls.

This is funny as hell. Besides, I imagine god's got some pretty damned good lawyers.

I'm also sort of curious what this guy expects to happen if he wins.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next