So the New York Times reported Sunday that Bob Dylan is the most-cited songwriter in judicial opinions in the United States. At least according to an analysis of the "uses and misuses" of song lyrics in legal writing.
Dylan has been quoted in 26 opinions in the lower U.S. courts. Paul Simon is next, with eight (12 if you count those attributed to Simon & Garfunkel). Bruce Springsteen has five, with The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, The Grateful Dead (dude) and Joni Mitchell trailing.
The latest cite, by U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts--and thought to be the first use of a rock lyric in a Supreme Court decision--was in a case about whether payphone companies could sue long-distance carriers:
“The absence of any right to the substantive recovery means that respondents cannot benefit from the judgment they seek and thus lack Article III standing,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote.“ ‘When you got nothing, you got nothing to lose.’ Bob Dylan, Like a Rolling Stone, on Highway 61 Revisited (Columbia Records 1965).”
As much as I love Dylan, I'm just not sure that Roberts' reliance on song lyrics instead of legal precedent is sound legal argument. Notwithstanding the obvious irony that the song lyric is about the feeling of freedom from not having possessions and not about who may sue a phone company. But hey, I'm neither a lawyer nor play one on TV.
Oh, and Roberts got the quote slightly wrong too. It's "When you ain't got nothing, you got nothing to lose."
Comments