The things they litigate about in the US

Supreme court opens term, rejects appeal on sex toy

From the above story:

The U.S. Supreme Court began a new term on Monday in which it will rule on landmark social cases, and it rejected about 1,900 appeals that piled up during its summer recess including a constitutional challenge to a Texas law that bans the sale of sex toys....

In the sex toys case, an employee of an adult bookstore in El Paso was arrested in 2003 for selling a vibrator to undercover police officers. He was charged under the Texas law that bans the sale of an "obscene device" designed primarily "for the stimulation of human genital organs."

His attorney challenged the law as unconstitutional, claiming it violated the right to sexual privacy without government interference. The court, which rejected a challenge to a similar Alabama law last year, denied the appeal without any comment.

Surely this shows that:

* Southern legislators have too much time on their hands;

* the Texas police asked to enforce such laws must find it a big joke;

* the fact that it would result in litigation in an attempt to overturn the law shows the ridiculous lengths to which some Americans see the judiciary as the solution to sorting out issues that should be dealt with in the ballot box.