Supreme Court Deadlocks in Landmark Freddy v Jason Case
The nation held its breath as the U.S. Supreme Court announced the outcome of the controversial case to determine the ultimate victor in a decades-long duel between Frederick Krueger and Jason Voorhees. Answers will not come easily, with the Court ending in a 4–4 deadlock, failing to put an end to the slasher feud.
The undecided outcome, made possible by a vacancy on the Court after the death of Antonin Scalia, only prolongs the deep rift between fans of the severely-burned nightmare killer and the lumbering giant behind the hockey mask.
Upon announcing the ruling, Chief Justice John Roberts effectively sent the case back to the lower courts to determine a proper setting and manner of execution for a “fight to the death that will render judicial encroachment completely unnecessary.” He added that both camps “possess sound reasoning for a claim to victory, with a rich history of violence and impressive body counts.”
The opinions issued by the justices did not follow typical alignments, with ideological leanings falling on both sides of the decision. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, known for upholding far reaches of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, demonstrated great empathy for Voorhees’ myriad of mental and physical afflictions. “I can only imagine the torment he’s endured for being different,” she wrote. “Plus, we all know if both killers were in this room, Jason would hack Freddy’s arm off and impale him with his own claw. That’s what he gets for wearing a Christmas sweater in the summer.”
Justice Clarence Thomas issued strong words against the Court’s failure to select a victor, along with a blistering takedown of Ginsburg’s genre cred. “Never has a decision been more obvious in my time on the bench,” Thomas’ opinion reads, “The majority is clearly evading responsibility for a ruling that could produce uproar in the slasher community. I, for one, am not afraid to rule by the facts. And the facts demonstrably show that Freddy could easily dispatch that momma’s boy through his nightmare craft. RBG clearly doesn’t know her horror. If he lost a limb, he could grow a new one. I don’t want to get all meta, but has she even seen Wes Craven’s New Nightmare?”
In the face of backlash, Roberts defended the call to defer the decision: “In the history of the Court’s jurisprudence, we have never weighed in on a ruling so clearly wrought with partisan agendas; the winner here will not be determined by the bench.” Analysts quickly pointed to the oft-criticized Bush v. Gore decision that influenced the outcome of the 2000 Presidential election, to which the court remained silent.