Venice of the West
(October 6, 2026)
Overview -
(KNS) The Supreme Court will hear opening arguments on the case commonly known as ‘Venice of the West.’ A bitter battle involving Miami, San Francisco, New York, and Venice, California, the case centering on who gets to call themselves the ‘Venice of the West.’ At stake are billions of dollars in tourist industry revenue. The ‘Venice of the West’ case is the first case to be heard by the Supreme Court in more than two years. The addition of Justice Kardasian to the court in August, bringing the number of justices to seven clearing the way for the ‘Venice of the West’ case to be heard.
“It was clear from the beginning that this case would wind up in the Supreme Court,” said one attorney from the Bay Area. Lobbyists concur. Said one highly placed lobbyist, “The Chambers of Commerce in Miami, New York, and San Francisco are not going to give in on their right to be called ‘Venice of the West.’ The changing climate demands that cities develop new revenue sources.”
Background -
Dramatic flooding in coastal cities like Miami, New York, and San Francisco has become a fixture of life in many cities along our coast. Offsetting the costs of sea level rise through increased tourism has become the favored method of raising funds in the developed nations. Following on success of places like TornadoPark in Oklahoma, Family FloodLand in North Carolina, Hike-the-Colorado in Arizona, and Old-Lake-Mead DiamondMine outside Las Vegas, cities and states around the globe seek ways to combat the changing climate through an ever-increasing portfolio of solutions.
But there are problems.
Said one media-advertising buyer, “It is a street fight out there for tourist-dollars. Despite falling population levels, cities must generate larger and larger pots of money every year to repair infrastructure, cope with the weird weather, deal with riots, and in the case of coastal cities, mitigate sea level rise. The municipalities that fall short of coping with these problems may simply disappear off the map.”
Attorneys for Moody’s echoed that opinion. “The rise in sea levels will accelerate its pace in the next decade. Cities like San Francisco are going to be flooded on a regular basis. And sure science has a place–it would be nice to solve the underlying problem of greenhouse gas pollution–but here in the real world cities hold people and they must meet the challenges of an infrastructure under attack and declining home values–if municipalities are to retain their credit ratings. A successful tourist advertising campaign can return a city to a B+ or even an A- bond rating. Centric to that campaign of revitalization is the right hook. For the city of San Francisco, for example, that is the moniker of ‘Venice of the West.’ San Francisco legally purchased that title from the VCSM (Venice California Swamp Memorial) as part of their ‘Help the Neighbors’ campaign. San Francisco has always been environmentally conscious and a good neighbor. On the other hand, there is the rule of law so ownership of the name ‘Venice of the West’ is in the hands of the nation’s highest court–exactly where it should be.”
Attorneys for New York City had another view. “New York City is no one-trick-pony like San Francisco. The name ‘Venice of the West’ is not some back-door, cheap, chop-shop advertising scam for us. We imported genuine Italian gondolas as part of the UN’s Climate Lend-Lease-Program that we use on the Canal Street waterway to supplement the flooded subway system. ‘Venice of the West’ is a side element in our plans to deal with a real issue, our flooded subway system. That said, we are cognizant advertising effectiveness is an essential element in our city’s revitalization program. We purchased the right to use ‘Venice of the West’ from Venice, Italy, as part of our WorldView Program. The term ‘Venice of the West’ is ours.”
Attorney’s for the City of Miami responded, “Sorry, the words climate change and global warming are banned in our state–so, no comment.”
When all four teams of attorneys, appearing on the reality TV show ‘Climate,’ were asked if a more proactive process like addressing GHG output would be more successful than bickering over advertising–we found their unified response both eerie and confusing. Every set of lawyers replied, “Human induced climate change is a fact of life. Should it have been dealt with a generation ago? Of course. Was it? No. And there we are. Today the challenges of anthropogenic forcing of the radiative balance are too numerous to be addressed. Perception and economics are the issues now. It’s not like the turn of the century when the climate was everyone’s focus and economics played a minor role. The result of which is our current need to cope with the failures of science today. We must focus on generating revenue rather than fighting a lost scientific battle. The rabid climate has changed us. Our view of science’s effectiveness has changed as well, but life goes on.”
“Not so,” said one religious leader who asked to remain anonymous. “Poor people are dying all over the world due to climate change. Worldwide GDP has contracted by almost 3% in the last nine months while the death tolls mount even in the developed nations like the US. What is the madness owning your country that it wishes reality to vanish in a storm of worthless paper?”
These comments prompted a hastily called news conference inside the new Lobbying Wing of Congress late Sunday night. Spokesperson after spokesperson–one for each of the major economic sectors–delivered the same rebuttal: “Taking proactive steps to minimize the horrific affect of Global Warming means taking care of equities. The rational course of action for a civilized society means more jobs, lower taxes for the wealthy, decreased trade barriers, and increased support for fossil fuels. That way–whatever the climate throws at us–we can deal with it.”
Only this reporter peeped, “Doesn’t a healthy economy require a healthy climate?”
Opening Arguments -
UPDATE: Opening arguments for the ‘Venice of the West’ case have been postponed. A derecho and its approaching tornadoes marched into Washington DC early Monday morning knocking down power lines, uprooting trees, and causing additional damage to the Washington Monument. A notice by the publicist for the Supreme Court stated, “…Even though Government Offices, including the Supreme Court, will be closed because of the derecho, the Southern Potomac Island Nexus (SPIN) with its hardened amusement systems will be open–with reduced entrance fees for legal assistants, court media, and their families.”
Attorneys on all sides immediately confirmed plans to attend SPIN should the court see fit to delay its hearing of the ‘Venice of the West’ beyond Monday. Said Justice Winston Smith, “Commerce makes America great. Ignorance made many of us wealthy. SPIN supersedes ignorance and division. SPIN is about adjustment to the changing climate. SPIN is the win.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.