It's The Taxonomy, Stupid

Decisionism is all about product development and innovation. So it is with overflowing exuberation that Decisionism introduces a bell – or is it a whistle? – a feature, in any event, that will accompany each post, regardless of topic, target, or significance.

From here on out, you’ll notice an introductory widget that sets forth some basic information:

Court: As in, the panel whence said opinion emanates.
Judge: As in, the judge penning said opinion.
Topic: As in the area of law upon which said judge opines in said opinion.
Tone: As in, the manner in which said judge opines in said opinion.
Importance: As in, on a scale of 0.0 to 10.0, how important the case is to the future of the Republic. 10.0 is reserved for a decision either saving the Republic from imminent collapse or (as seems more likely these days) a decision that proximately causes said collapse. This category is, of course, entirely objective.

Seeing this taxonomy in action should provide an idea of how it will work. Let’s take Marbury v. Madison, for example:

Court: U.S. Supreme Court
Judge: Marshall (Not Thurgood)
Subject: Separation of Powers
Tone: Almoste Olde English
Importance: 9.9

Or Bush v. Gore:

Court: U.S. Supreme Court
Judge: ?
Subject: Equal Protection of Inanimate Objects
Tone: Unintelligible
Importance: 8.7

So let’s see how it works!