If your only source of news was the New York Times, you might think that America's greatest scourges today were sexting and class-action lawsuits.
The latter piece is particulary galling, as it clothes the extreme opinions of Justice Scalia in a pseudo-scientific drivel of "rights" and "representation." We are warned that female employees of Wal-Mart "would be bound by the result in the case even though they had not volunteered for it and had no right to opt out and sue on their own." Because, of course, the right to bankrupt yourself challenging the nation's biggest retailer is paramount. Furthermore, one Court of Appeals judge believes "that something more than a 'mechanical computation' was needed to decide who gets how much money should the women win." What is that something? Babylonian entrail divination?