Re: Case No. 25-1638 — Petition for Certiorari for Publication of “MARBURY v. MARBURY”
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF EDITORIAL DISCRETION
Liana Marie Sive, Petitioner v. The Editors of The Journal of Unsettled Law, Respondents
No. 25-1638
PETITION FOR CERTIORARI FOR PUBLICATION
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
Pursuant to Article III (probably) and Rule 4½ of The Journal of Unsettled Law’s Unwritten Rules of Humor, Petitioner respectfully invokes the Court’s discretionary jurisdiction to consider publication of a satire entitled “MARBURY v. MARBURY.” Jurisdiction exists, if at all, by implication, tradition, and good taste.
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
1. Whether a judicial opinion consisting solely of nine Justices Thomas may constitutionally review the constitutionality of Marbury v. Madison.
2. Whether recursive reasoning, if carried far enough, becomes precedent or parody.
3. Whether The Journal of Unsettled Law possesses authority to print a work that denies its own printability.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Petitioner has composed a satirical opinion of precisely 1,638 words — the first of three inquiries into the nature of self-referential paradoxes, all filed under Case 1638 — thereby achieving numerical consonance with its docket number (No. 25-1638). The opinion reverses, affirms, and remands itself repeatedly, creating a jurisprudential Möbius strip suitable for light lunchtime reading. All footnotes are Bluebook-compliant, except those that cite themselves.
ARGUMENT
1. The Journal of Unsettled Law has long exercised plenary power over the nation’s sense of legal proportion. Publishing this piece would reaffirm that power while simultaneously calling it into question.
2. Publication would serve substantial public interest by demonstrating, through example, the hazards of reasoning with a perfectly consistent logic.
3. No adequate remedy exists in any other forum; the Harvard Law Review lacks jurisdiction over humor, and the Yale Law Journal denies standing to jokes.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully prays that this Honorable Journal:
1. Grant certiorari for publication;
2. Issue an opinion, concurrence, or witty footnote acknowledging receipt;
3. Hold that even if The Journal of Unsettled Law lacks authority to publish, its lack of authority shall be construed as self-executing approval; and
4. Award such further relief as equity, irony, or pagination may require.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Liana Marie Sive Petitioner, Author, and Counsel of Record for Herself Executed electronically pursuant to the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act of 2000 (E-SIGN), consistent with the federal preference for current delivery in capital matters.
ABOUT THE PETITIONER
Liana Marie Sive earned degrees from the University of California, San Diego, and the California Institute of Technology before entering Emory University’s Ph.D. program in Economics and the School of Law, where she placed fourth in Constitutional Law, ninth in Property, and somewhat lower in Torts. She withdrew after illness and a $1 million investment dispute that converted $35,000 into an accelerated course in contracts and remedies. She lives in Maine and remains under perpetual review as Case 1638.