Welcome to the Judge John Hodgman podcast. I'm Baylif Jesse Thorne. Tonight, sort reform. Please welcome our litigants, David and Natalie.

David and Natalie have a disagreement about laundry. When it's clean, how should it be folded and prepared to be put away?

David sorts it into two big piles, his and hers. Natalie prefers to have her clothing sorted by article. Who is right and who is wrong? Only one man can decide. Please rise as Judge John Hodgman enters the courtroom.

You may be seated. In my opinion, we're confronted here with something of a situation. Otherwise, I would have not have presumed to take up your time.

Once again, it concerns the case of David and Natalie. We know we don't want anything extraordinary to happen to them. We've already agreed on that. No accidents, nothing unusual.

The Court of Judge John Hodgman was created to demonstrate the futility of individual judgment. And the court must do its work. The court has done all its can. And if a champion defeats the meaning for which the court was designed, then he must lose. I hope you agree with my reasoning.

Please raise your right hands. Do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God or whatever? Do you swear? Please raise your right hands. Don't make me cross.

Do you swear to abide by Judge John Hodgman's ruling despite the fact that all of his clothes are self-cleaning?

I do.

I do very well, Judge Hodgman.

David, Natalie, for an immediate summary judgment, can either of you name the piece of popular culture that I was referencing as I stood here at the bench for the very first time?

A few good men?

That is incorrect.

Got me.

No guests?

No guests.

I was quoting John Hausman from the 1975 film Roller Ball.

The a few good men of the 70s.

Now, can you guess why I chose Roller Ball to quote?

I play Roller Derby.

Because you play Roller Derby, is that not so?

That is correct.

...