Absolute Worst Pun in a Published Law Review Article

I came across this law review article today and almost laughed myself out of the library. It includes the worst pun I have ever read. I keep asking myself, how can anyone with any intellectual integrity write this? More importantly, how could anyone publish this? See for yourself......

"ANTI-VIBRATOR LEGISLATION: THE LAW IS ON SHAKY GROUND
Nicole Schilder

"I think this is an uncommonly silly law." [Justice Stewart]

I. Introduction

Are women getting the shaft when it comes to the constitutional right of privacy? According to a handful of state legislatures and the Eleventh Circuit, states can criminalize the sale of sexual devices, based primarily on the idea that the privacy right does not extend to that arena. Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, Texas, and Virginia currently have such statutes. Similar statutes were struck down by the Colorado Supreme Court in 1985, the Kansas Supreme Court in 1990, and by a Louisiana court of appeals in 1999. The existing statutes prohibit the sale of what the legislatures have chosen to term "obscene devices," which are almost uniformly described as instruments designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs. This Note addresses whether such statutes should be struck down as unconstitutional...

[....]"

The full cite to the article is 29 Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly 89, Fall 2001. I still can't believe they printed this slop. The article concludes that ALL state laws banning the sale of sexual devices should be struck down as unconstitutional under the "fundamental implied right to privacy." Oh, and by the way, sweetie, note that your introductory quote, by Justice Stewart, dissenting in Griswold v. Connecticut, was followed by the statement that although a law might be silly, unwise, asinine, or impossible to enforce, it doesn't follow that it can be held unconstitutional. They should have given this article "the shaft"!!!!!