O'Connor Backs Educational Videogames About Judicial System

By TChris, Section Supreme Court
Posted on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 02:47:19 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

This is totally cool:

America's first female Supreme Court justice unveiled a videogame project last week to teach children how courts work, saying she wanted to counter partisan criticism that judges are "godless" activists.
Sandra Day O'Connor, 78, who served as U.S. Supreme Court justice from 1981 until her retirement in 2006, said she ... got involved with developing the project called "Our Courts" out of concern over public ignorance about the judiciary and partisan attacks on what should be an independent institution.

Can't argue with this:

She said the only way to preserve an independent judiciary was through public education, which she said was failing to produce citizens with enough knowledge about the three branches of U.S. government -- legislative, executive and judicial.

After kids learn how to steal cars by playing Grand Theft Auto IV, they can learn what happens after a car theft arrest by playing Our Courts.

< Saturday Afternoon Open Thread | Saturday Evening Open Thread >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

O'Connor Backs Educational Videogames About Judicial System | 24 comments (24 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Great! (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by indy in sc on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 02:51:07 PM EST

This is great...I wonder whether it would catch on, though. I guess if they make it good enough, it will. Kind of like the Wii tricking kids into exercising by having games that require actual movement by them.

Justice O'Connor (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by samanthasmom on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 02:51:18 PM EST

continues to be one of my personal heroes. When I interview young women for jobs, and they give me a list of their impressive accomplishments, I always say, "But can you type?"

Completely agree (none / 0) (#25)
by samtaylor2 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 07:06:30 PM EST

She just seems like such a straight shooting compassionate person. Honestly, it is almost a good thing that she wasn't replaced by another female judge by a republican administration (as my hero Marshall was replaced by Justice Thomas by a republican administration), as it would have been an insult to justice O'Connor and a shining example of tokenism being used against us. I think it is the saddest aspect of our supreme court today that there is not a female voice on the court.


: Umm... there is still a female on (none / 0) (#26)
by auboy2007 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:02:13 PM EST

the court.
Though there should be more.

LOL (5.00 / 3) (#3)
by Molly Bloom on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 03:04:53 PM EST

After kids learn how to steal cars by playing Grand Theft Auto IV, they can learn what happens after a car theft arrest by playing Our Courts

I love it!

Maybe they can call the video game ... (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by Inky on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 03:22:27 PM EST

"Grand Theft Election 2000." That should appeal to the youngsters.

: The (5.00 / 2) (#15)
by Wile ECoyote on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 04:03:08 PM EST

attempt to disqualify military absentee ballots can be on the expansion pack.

: How about Grand Theft (5.00 / 1) (#20)
by FemB4dem on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 06:04:41 PM EST

Michigan 2008?

Great idea they should do the same with our hist. (5.00 / 2) (#7)
by iceblinkjm on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 03:25:53 PM EST

it would also be great if they would place more emphasis on our history as a nation and our shared identity.I read a news report the other day that we are in danger of loosing it as well. 45% of young people 18-30 survyed believe the US Constitution should be subordinate and secondary to the UN/international law!?!?! I don't think so

Will they learn they've got a right (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by Ben Masel on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 03:53:55 PM EST

to play Grand Theft Auto?

So What Happens (5.00 / 1) (#17)
by creeper on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 04:40:55 PM EST

when the kids come face to face with the realization that O'Connor would fail her own game...that the system it touts is completely at the mercy of judges like her?

The respect I had for Sandra Day O'Connor went out the window with her vote on Bush v Gore.

Insiders say she now regrets that vote. Too bad she doesn't have guts enough to admit it.

: You mean... (none / 0) (#24)
by p lukasiak on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 06:46:51 PM EST

Grand Theft: Elections?

Nice idea, but... (none / 0) (#6)
by Dadler on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 03:25:35 PM EST

...parents must buy this stuff for their kids. Will they? I doubt it. Unless the parents themselves have this knowledge and think it vital to pass on to their kids. But parents largely don't know it. As it is now, there are a few video game types that are educational (Leapster comes to mind, which my son has...and which most kids would think is geek gear), and they sell nothing compared to Wii, playstation, what have you. If these games are not as fast paced and action oriented as games are today, well, they'll sadly fail. Society and its inhabitants have changed, our attention spans are not what they were and, barring a miracle, they ain't coming back. That's what change is. Hell, you don't even see kids PLAYING outside like they used to. I'd like to think this would catch on, but it's all in the design. And designing this so that kids would actually be engrossed like they must be in it, that's a very tough thing to pull off. I hope they do, but I'm not holding my breath. Just like Harry Potter did not translate into kids reading other, more challenging stuff, I doubt this video game will do much but collect dust on the shelves. Televising the Supreme Court would do more. Simply starting out with mock courts in first grade to settle disputes would, too.

But, hey, I wish them well in developing this.

: If I understand correctly ... (none / 0) (#13)
by eustiscg on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 04:02:24 PM EST

... this would be aimed at schools more than parents. I'm betraying my age here, but I remember learning quite a bit about early American life from Oregon Trail (like how fast squirrels used to be ... snark).

kids and people in general just want good games (none / 0) (#8)
by DandyTIger on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 03:41:45 PM EST

so if these are good, they will be popular. If they're like many games made from movies (vs. the other way around), they will probably not be popular. It's all about having good gameplay. And believe it or not, some of those with less than ideal subject matter are made really well. But funny enough, some of the very best designed games (in terms of gameplay) are some of those very silly nintendo cartoony types of games.

This is definitely a great way to educate if it can be done well. I'd like to see games/entertainment/learning products for all areas of education like the sciences, history, economics, etc. But no matter how good the subject mater, kids will see a crapily designed game from a mile away. Fingers crossed that this will be a good project.

Sounds like a (none / 0) (#12)
by Wile ECoyote on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 04:02:22 PM EST

great idea. Which company is going to do it? Is there a market for it?

Hopefully... (none / 0) (#16)
by MileHi Hawkeye on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 04:39:15 PM EST

...it will be as catchy as School House Rock was. Anything that can catch a kids attention and teach them something would be a good thing.

She has always been my hero (none / 0) (#18)
by Leisa on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 05:04:54 PM EST

Here is another project of hers...

I'M JUST A BILLL! Teach them ELECTION ETIQUETTE! (none / 0) (#21)
by janedw420 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 06:06:56 PM EST

Next time the 18-30 crowd, who blogged our brains into numbness, would not ask a candidate to quit, or take cheap shots at anything other than POLICY proposals.

Or maybe include a Jeopardy-style betting (none / 0) (#22)
by FemB4dem on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 06:12:42 PM EST

game on who can author the longest, and most tendencious, opinion on various subject like -- oh I know -- the 11th Amendment?

Scalia for 50, Alex?

Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner!

plus/minus (none / 0) (#23)
by Addison on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 06:16:23 PM EST

It's certainly not a bad idea, but I (and every Virginia 5th grader of my age) received civic education. I don't know if it was worthwhile in the long-term sense.

Sadly, as with most things, the agenda of the government -- no matter which branch, no matter what issue -- is going to be set by the people on TV, not in the classrooms. Children are led by parents, parents are led by politicians.

It's a flaw in democracy, not insuperable, but certainly that's the locus of influence.

I heard Justice O'Connor speak (none / 0) (#27)
by oculus on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:47:37 PM EST

recently. She sd. most people in the U.S. know the names of the three stooges, with which she had no quarrel, but couldn't name the three branches of government; hence her support for this project.

how to steal an election (none / 0) (#29)
by glennmcgahee on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 06:53:00 AM EST

Will the appointment of George Bush be included in this "really cool" video game? Please, someone inform the author about Sandra and her politics using the Supreme Court to appoint a drug using alcoholic to the Presidency. If you want a REAL video game, try playing the voting machine game that has been bought and sold to the highest bidder to game elections. Now THAT is a game. You won't be hearing much about the machines until after the November elections. After all, the people in Congress already have jobs so why should they care.

ok, i hate to be the one (none / 0) (#30)
by cpinva on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 01:25:12 PM EST

to deflate justice o'connor, but judges are supposed to be "godless activists", it's their job.

notice in the constitution it makes no mention, anywhere, of god. notice as well the establishment clause, keeping the govt's nose out of religion, and vice versa.

surely justice o'connor is aware of this; that judges are supposed to be independent triers of fact, determine, by law, what evidence is allowed in and, when necessary, interpret poorly written legislation. none of this has anything to do with god, but could be considered, in a stretch, "activism".

so yes, i hope, in the execution of their judicial duties, they are "godless activists".