Ok. I just read the decision and the dissent.
Thanks, Tom, for the link. So Scalia managed to find
Harrison Bergeron.... Scalia's dissent is pure Scalia and
brilliant. Unforunately, the majority is clearly correct in
its interpretation of the law. Scalia's points are
good but they're more against the fundamental nature
of the ADA which was based on naive egalitarianism
to begin with and then written so broadly as to
reach the outcome that we've seen here. I am now
apprehensive that it could indeed apply to QB. What to do
about it? If a court was to look at CBI stuff only,
they might find that hearing pyramid tossups word by
word is not an essential part of the game. Of course,
virtually every other written material on the game would
differentiate from that. Still, it might be prudent to say form
some general QB-community agreement (excluding CBI but
hopefully including ACF and NAQT) making it clear that the
game is not "trivia" or "college bowl" but a game
centering around the pyramid tossup.
my two cents
and not legal advice (cheez the disclaimers you have
to use after taking professional
responsibility)
nathan freeburg