Headline: Supreme Court Assumes Authority to Determine Democratic Presidential Candidate

[O.M.B.inOhio]

"I wish I were on the Court in 2000," said Chief Justice Roberts, "so President Bush would not have been anointed Leader of the Free World by one unprincipled vote. It should have been two."
As took place in Florida in 2000, the Supreme Court has opted to step in where the will of the people appears to be marginally against the status quo.
"This is a Federal issue, clearly," declared Justice Antonin Scalia at a press conference this morning, "and it is clear that the Supreme Court must step in and make a decision, although it must not be considered a precedent or an evaluation of the Constitutionality of a position.
"By my reckoning, we will be deciding 6 to 3 in favor of Senator Clinton," Scalia continued, standing at a lectern in his underwear and socks. "I cannot speak for the legal reasoning of the other Justices, but you know me - a strict Originalist. And as an Originalist, I felt it my Constitutional duty to recalculate a vote for Mr. Obama as three-fifths of a vote. The three-fifths clause is well established in our history. Furthermore, I have instructed the Senate cafeteria to serve Mr. Obama a three-fifths portion of his entree."