'I Don't Think That's True': Amy Coney Barrett Fires Back At Lawyer In Warhol Case

Justice Amy Coney Barrett questions lawyers in Andy Warhol Found. for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith.
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: / forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: / forbes
More From Forbes: forbes.com

[@stephenstevens6573]

Why is the Supreme court wasting it's time on crap like this when we have real issues facing this nation??????

[@taradeleeuw2344]

It’s all about going backwards ,convoluted,erasers ,actors, Certainly it’s not about making lives better or identifying authority Supreme Court is a joke

[@iamkesha.]

Same thing I want to know.

[@sumduma55]

Because it's what they do. What did you expect them to do?

[@stephenstevens6573]

@@sumduma55 actually elect to hear cases that matter???

[@sumduma55]

@@stephenstevens6573 given that copyright is explicitly mentioned in the constitution, I would suggest it matters quite a bit. Especially when it entails how much prior art can influence a work and having it be separate from the prior art.

[@pennylaur7687]

This isnt a Constitutional crisis case, doesnt affect Americans being abused n needing protection from the corrupt judicial branch of lower courts. Could we please get some rulings on the Constitutional rights of Americans being squashed under the heavy boots of the govt? Thank you.

[@brownleatherboot277]

How did this BS get made a priority and pushed ahead of so many other way more important issues?

[@jacksoncowsert6964]

Because that’s not how the courts work. Besides, all cases should be equally important in the law especially in line with the impartiality of the justices. Hope this helps.

[@brownleatherboot277]

@@jacksoncowsert6964 I was under the impression this court has certain criteria and then is also voted on to be brought before court. That was just an assumption though and I am most likely wrong. Thank you though

[@walkinlight3380]

This is a priority for the Supreme Court with so many other cases??? Wow.

[@dedetudor.]

Who can possibly understand how these people's minds work?🤷 What is Supreme anymore?

[@williampennjr.4448]

it is when the judge are invested in art.

[@philliplewis3754]

We are talking about advertising, it's an industry ready to reach the trillion dollar benchmark, so yes, the Supreme Court needs to determine what is fair use and legal to use someone else's intellectual property. When the Supreme Court refuses a case they kick it back to the lower courts, it doesn't just evaporate.

[@philliplewis3754]

@@j.7647 Nobody has brought charges against them, the ATF & FBI and God only knows the CIA, requiring a legal interpretation of the law. It would be the House of Representatives responsibility to correct these Federal government entities and seeking legal help from the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has never said hey, we see something wrong that we need to fix. The Liberal Supreme Court would refuse every 2nd Amendment case's because they hate 2A. The Conservative Supreme Court is being unindated with 2A case's and the Supreme Court is looking at almost all of them and laws violating 2A are being reversed. There are rules the ATF has instituted simply to keep as many firearms and accessory innovations out of people's hands that are being overturned. Right now this Supreme Court is kicking some ATF ass and the ATF isn't liking much. The Supreme Court doesn't SEEK injustices they are BROUGHT injustices to correct. That's why the Republican's are threatening everyone about the midterms, they say, if we take the House the investigations will start and they will involve the Supreme Court.

[@jacksoncowsert6964]

Because that’s not how the courts work. Besides, all cases should be equally important in the law especially in line with the impartiality of the justices. Hope this helps.

[@ketokarbs3671]

What has happened to America

[@mjef3695]

Three words!!! WTF???

[@johnrozs]

Your obviously not a democrat otherwise you would have "two words" then WTF

[@bodarville2510]

The house is blazing but they snuff out a candle.

[@blaws6684]

Quietly many art folks mumble “Warhol was a very popular fraud. “ He was only famous because bohemian types can’t admit they got taken.

[@larryroberts4984]

We just don't know the idiosey of all these elected and appointed officials.

[@lexied]

JEWISH

[@frodomocho1211]

Idiocy

[@polarfamily6222]

What's sad to see in most comments are the large number of "intelligent people" that can't understand that this is, in effect, an important 1A case.

[@HK-uj9qc]

WTF! Andy Warhol case???? We dont have anything more frikn important???!!!

[@rexterry4722]

Warhol made millions off his painting. The subject was not nature or public image. He used a photograph taken by an artist. That was his artistic realm, to paint celebrities from photos. He should throw a few bucks to the photographer, just out of fairness and as an act of class/ character.

[@InvertedEarth]

Why? No one cares. This is literally the least important thing right now. Has everyone gone insane….

[@ConernicusRex]

Not a big fan of knowing how the legal system works or even how it’s structured, huh? Sixth grade must have been tough.

[@pennylaur7687]

Yes, they have.

[@burkejones8277]

What??😂

[@mrlatino1964]

The circus continues to the highest courts of the land, unbelievable

[@lst9559]

We have to keep our Representives on their toes and scale down or stop this garbage. I agree what a waste of their (supreme court) time.

[@rustic_russian]

This is pathetic

[@GurpreetKaur-hj9xg]

They don't have better cases to look at. What a waste of time..

[@imheretolearn770]

Waste of time and money

[@stevenichols2938]

Lots of comments complaining that this case isn't important. The problem is that everyone, big and small, has a right to have a grievance addressed. For God's sake, look at the historical level of several recent cases! This case can impact hundreds or thousands of future and bigger cases - if SCOTUS makes a definitive ruling, that clears potentially hundreds or thousands of cases down the road.

[@garykirk9888]

Amy Coney stand your Constitutional grounds proud of your interpretation of law also standing firm on these grounds!!!

[@tonicalloway7227]

I think Warhol used Campbell's soup because Campbell soup was soup,not a household name..like a xerox copy or Ajax orwindex..when you say "get me these things " it doesn't mean it has to be that brand,but that product..so if Google used cans..that would be a concept like the concept that Warhol was trying to portray ie..the soup in a can..so Google will have portrayed the same kind of concept from Warhol as Warhol did with campbell's almost..Warhol focused on the soup itself and Google focused on the cans..not the soup..either way it's all petty..

[@MegaAli213]

Let's hear more Second amendment case's or first amendment case's, that's much more important than this type of 1% nonsense.

[@truffleturkey7]

Insane this is what the Supreme Court spends it time on when the country is collapsing. Having a what the hell moment.

[@shannaconda3434]

I agree with the premise of almost every comment on this thread! what a waste of fucking time, effort, and tax payer money.

[@jbawz358]

Nothing true about ACB except incompetence

[@Lonely_Goat]

Imagine your case was backlogged and waiting to be heard and you hear this.

[@MegaAli213]

Unless ~

[@justaformer11b95]

WTF IS THIS WASTE OF TIME!? Literally our right are being violated and they do this bill shit?

[@ConernicusRex]

Why does the trailer trash cannon fodder think it gets to talk?

[@servsyou]

Maybe I’m I shootings in the dark here but isn’t it illegal to take pictures or video recording in the Supreme Court Mr Forbes or is it only legal for secret audio recording

[@tomfox4913]

Yeah, really. Why did the Supreme Court bother with such an unimportant issue? My answer: they just wanted a little break from the issues that are tearing the country apart. It's like they decided to eat the dessert first. But, it's self-serving and a complete waste of their brains. - the Tomster

[@sarasdaman69]

УЗНАЕМ 6 НОЯБРЯ...

[@caenterprisellc6922]

I (Charlene A Terrell) moved on from J.

[@williamwhite1596]

Deuteronomy 22:5 KJV BIBLE / Leviticus 20:13 KJV BIBLE / Jeremiah 19:4 KJV BIBLE !!!

[@zyajones9360]

This is a nonfactor case if anything Warhol estate should just win this case because anybody can use original art too their original art of their liking .,,,case closed now move on .

[@sarasdaman69]

ВЫ ВЕРИТЕ В ПЕРЕЗАГРУЗКУ...??? А Я НЕТ...

[@tigercatjones9948]

I couldn't understand a word Amy Coney Barrett said... was she speaking in tongues?

[@kashakellar]

You sould, or would if you were able to actually listen and understand. Are you unable? Can you decipher other court hearings according to lingo and intellect?

[@sarasdaman69]

ВЫ ВЕРИТЕ ЧТО Я ВАМ ПОЗВОЛЮ СИДЕТЬ В ХРАМЕ БОГА И ПРАВИТЬ МИРОМ...??? НЕТ НЕ ПОЗВОЛЮ...

[@sarasdaman69]

ВЫ НИЧЕГО НЕ ПОЛУЧИТЕ НИКАКИХ ТЕХНОЛОГИЙ...

[@telmagarcia4620]

Emycome corupta

[@ziztergabriellahawaii4877]

🕎🐆 ZIZTER GABRIELLA 🐆🕎 HERE 🐾💖👥 UGUYZ 👥💖 THE SIEGE OF UNRELENTING ➿ INTIMIDATION WORKED😿😿😿‼️‼️‼️