Scalia's Chicago pizza injustice

Conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia took a narrow reading of Chicago-style pizza when he called it "very tasty" but "not pizza."

Chicago UNO Pizza

To some in Chicago, this ruling might be considered defamation of our deep dish institution.

In town Friday for the Union League Club of Chicago's George Washington Birthday celebration, Scalia raised the most eyebrows since Mayor Emanuel was forced to defend deep dish on the Daily Show. It made me wonder if Scalia wants to book an appearance with Jon Stewart. It's not that I'm calling Justice Scalia an attention whore, but it looks like he is just jumping on the bandwagon.

The attack on Chicago deep dish leads me to consider if he is being consistent with the Pope v. Illinois (1987) case, in which Justice Scalia mused about the mythical reasonable man standard of obscenity law:

I must note, however, that in my view it is quite impossible to come to an objective assessment of (at least) literary or artistic value, there being many accomplished people who have found literature in Dada, and art in the replication of a soup can. Since ...ratiocination has little to do with esthetics, the fabled "reasonable man" is of little help in the inquiry, and would have to be replaced with, perhaps, the "man of tolerably good taste" - a description that betrays the lack of an ascertainable standard. If evenhanded and accurate decision making is not always impossible under such a regime, it is at least impossible in the cases that matter. I think we would be better advised to adopt as a legal maxim what has long been the wisdom of mankind: De gustibus non est disputandum. Just as there is no use arguing about taste, there is no use litigating about it. For the law courts to decide "What is Beauty" is a novelty even by today's standards.

Yet, here were are again challenging Chicago's right to define the art of making tasty pizza. I respectfully dissent.

Leave a comment