SADIE WARREN: For the same reason we have come before you today. A child born in the United States in 1900 could expect to live fifty, maybe fifty-five years. That same child born today will likely live to eighty or eighty-five, maybe much longer. This Court has always relied on the test of reason for its decisions. I ask you, how is it reasonable that, when we’ve made the human lifespan longer, we’re making childhood shorter? You all had free time when you were kids. Chief Justice Reynolds, you were on the wrestling team in high school. That made you tough—and not just in the ring. Justice Cohen, you reread Pride and Prejudice every year. Not because you had to for a class, but because it was your favorite book. Justice Suerte, you were a Yankees fan. I’ll bet you learned a lot of math just from keeping track of their stats. And if you hadn’t had free time to watch Perry Mason, would you have fallen in love with the law? And you, Justice Rauch, you grew up in Colorado, one of our nation’s most beautiful states. Think about the time you spent outdoors. Wasn’t that a part of your education? Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court, you have the power to make a sea change in the lives of young people today. Give us back our childhoods. Give us the freedom to follow our own interests, to be curious again, to dream, and to have time to spend with our friends, our parents and grandparents, and our little brothers and sisters. Give us, as only you can, the ultimate homework pass: end it for all time.
(You know how I said the Supreme Court is as quiet as a cathedral? Not now, it isn’t. There’s cheering from the audience and the press. Cheering for my big sister.)
CHIEF JUSTICE REYNOLDS: Thank you, Miss Warren.
(The clerk resets the clock. There’s no time for the bathroom or snacks or even to breathe because here comes Livingston Gulch.)
TRANSCRIPT
ORAL ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
CHIEF JUSTICE REYNOLDS: Mr. Gulch?
(Livingston Gulch stands, his hands tucked into the pockets of his green jacket. As he and Sadie walk past each other, he nods at her. He steps to the lectern and stands there in a long silence even though the Supreme Court clock is already counting down from 30:00. He stays perfectly still until the clock hits 29:30, and the first words step out of Gulch’s mouth.)
LIVINGSTON GULCH: Loco. Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court, this is a case of in loco parentis. For those of you who don’t do your homework, that’s Latin for “in place of the parents.” It’s been the cornerstone of public education since the very first day of school. Society has given—and this Court has upheld—the right of the school boards to act in the best interest of the students.
JUSTICE RENFRO: How’s this a loco parentis case? Homework is supposed to be done at home.
LIVINGSTON GULCH: Well, Justice Renfro, it’s precisely because so many parents are not at home after four that the schools need to extend in loco parentis into the evening hours. With homework. It keeps the latchkey kids out of trouble.
JUSTICE COHEN: What about the homes where there are tutors or educated parents to help? What do you say to Miss Warren’s argument that this creates an equal protection violation?
LIVINGSTON GULCH: I say the same thing I noted in my brief. Libraries with free homework help are available to all who can’t afford a tutor.
JUSTICE SUERTE: And you think that paves a level playing field in our nation’s schools?
LIVINGSTON GULCH: The playing field will never be level in this country, Justice Suerte. It’s not the American way. Some will have to work harder to get across it, as I did by working my way through law school, and as you and your brother, Juan, did by studying the encyclopedia.
(He bugged our suite at the Watergate. He bugged us for sure!)
JUSTICE RENFRO: What if homework’s not in the best interest of the child? What if, as Miss Warren suggests, it’s akin to illegal child labor?
LIVINGSTON GULCH: Next thing you know she’ll claim it’s a violation of the Thirteenth Amendment.
JUSTICE WILLIAMS: That’s not what she said.
(Huge gasp from the audience! Justice Williams just broke his longtime silence.)
LIVINGSTON GULCH: Sounded like she was going there to me, Justice Williams.
JUSTICE WILLIAMS: She said that the labor of homework benefits the real estate and pharmaceutical industries. And since children aren’t being paid to do it, it violates the Fair Labor Standards Act. I’m intrigued by the argument.
CHIEF JUSTICE REYNOLDS: Why are we putting so much pressure on children, especially since, as Miss Warren pointed out, we’re living longer than we used to?
LIVINGSTON GULCH: The trouble with her lifespan argument, Chief, is that children born today are going to have a harder time finding a job, because senior citizens—I’m not pointing any fingers, Justice Rosenburg—are taking longer to step down.
JUSTICE DEFAZIO: Does the state—in this case the schools—have the right to mandate behavior in people’s homes?
LIVINGSTON GULCH: By that line of thinking, Justice DeFazio, people will say they don’t have to fill out their tax returns. We’ve all got homework due on the fifteenth of April, don’t we?
JUSTICE ROSENBURG: Surely the emotional health of a child is consistent with the pursuit of happiness, Mr. Gulch. Homework does seem to be taking away that right from our children.
LIVINGSTON GULCH: Pursuit of happiness is an adult’s right, Justice Rosenburg, not a child’s. First they have to be educated. Then they have to get jobs. Then they can pay for their happiness.
JUSTICE COHEN: Are you suggesting that this Court made a mistake when it ruled in Tinker v. Des Moines that students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate?
JUSTICE RAUCH:
