The U.S. government recently passed sweeping running shoe legislation in response to exorbitant price hikes in running shoes and apparel and the accompanying bitching by millions of running citizens—legal running citizens—the government assures you. The government is dubbing these 10 amendments to the “Running Constitution” as the “Running Shoe Bill of Rights.”
What does it mean for U.S. runners? You’ve got unalienable rights, and although I have no legal background, I’m here to help you understand your freedoms beyond simply life, liberty, and the pursuit of running happiness—remember, running happiness is never guaranteed. Running boredom, running sadness, and running anger are far more likely to occur.
Amendment I: Right to Free Expression
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of a shoe religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of expression.
In other words, run and let run. The first amendment prohibits the government from punishing runners for running fashion crimes, including wearing obnoxiously bright-colored shoes. The government feels their narcissistic tendencies are no one’s business but their own—although I’m sure they’d love to tell you all about them. Same goes for the milquetoast, uninspiring personalities of runners in lame all-black shoes. Oh, and likewise for the all-white shoe crew, who foolishly believe they’re holier than thou because of their pristine-looking footwear. They hide behind a thin veneer of purity, but we know about the dark secrets they hide on the inside.
It’s truly great this amendment prevents the government from casting judgment on runners with questionable taste. You never know what a runner is going through in their life when you see them wearing that brand that makes expensive yet poor quality running gear. And you can’t expect to be aware of the types of delusions running through a runner’s mind when you see them in a pair of shoes that was released more than five years ago.
The government understands we can’t possibly comprehend the kinds of demons runners exorcise during exercise. Like the runners wearing tights and long sleeves when the temperature is above 70 degrees Fahrenheit. Or the freaks who wear 1” shorts and a singlet when it dips below water’s freezing point. I guess they’ll do anything — including risking frostbite and heat exhaustion—to try and vanquish those evil spirits.
Fortunately, the government is legally required not to punish runners for any of these questionable shoe and gear choices.
Amendment II: Right to Bear Arms—Full of Shoes
To the security of a free State running shoe rotation, the right of the people to keep and bear arms—full of running shoes—shall not be infringed.
It’s our God-given right to bear armfuls of running shoes. They’ll have to physically pry ‘em from our feet if they want to take ‘em from our running shoe rotation. Some models are heavier and bulkier to murder recovery day,. Others are light and nimble to kill speed workouts. And you’ve got the classic middle of the pack shoes to annihilate daily training.
In this polarizing political climate, we simply must stockpile shoes in case brands discontinue models or if the U.S. Track and Field (USATF) outlaws shoes with gigantic stack heights. Any day now, I just know Congress will meet to discuss new limits for shoes and shoe buyers. But, it won’t matter. Runners will always find a way to get shoes on their feet even if some are banned or criminalized.
Amendment III: Quartering of soldiers shoes
No soldier shoe shall, in time of peace or war, be quartered in any house, without the consent of the shoe owner.
Sweet! I’m not sure what war and peace have to do with running shoes, but I’m psyched! This one essentially says we are free to pack up and return any pair of running shoes we’re done with well after the return window has closed and long after hundreds upon hundreds of miles of wear and tear. It’s up to the shoe owner to decide whether a pair of shoes is permitted to stay in the house; so go buck wild returning any and every pair and demanding any and every refund! We’ll never pay for another pair of shoes again!
Amendment IV: No Shoe Search and Arrest
The right of the people running shoes to be secure with their persons, and in their houses, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.
Phew! A huge sigh of relief for shoe owners who possess “illegal” max cushion pairs with a stack height exceeding 40 mm, like the ASICS Superblast, HOKA Skyward X, Adidas Prime X Strung, and Saucony Kinvara Pro, to name a few. Sure, they’re not professional runners and the 40 mm maximum stack height restriction is a USATF restriction only applicable to professional runners competing in USATF competition, but that’s not important. If you want to go pro as a runner, you simply must do everything exactly as they do. You should probably go ahead and quit your day job.
Amendment V: Rights in Criminal Cases
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Yikes. Too many words in this one. Let’s just skip it.
Amendment VI: Right to a Fair Shoe Trial
In all criminal prosecutions shoe reviews, the shoes shall enjoy the right to a lengthy and public trial, by an impartial jury of shoe reviewers.
Is it truly possible to be 100% unbiased? This amendment seems to think so. Or, more accurately, the Founding Fathers and Mothers of Running seemed to think so when they developed this amendment. Every pair of running shoes is legally required to accumulate at least 40 miles before a reviewer can start their review.
But it can’t be just any reviewer. Shoe reviewers must be impartial and completely honest about their thoughts. Right, that’ll definitely happen. That’s like saying grass doesn’t get wet when it rains. Have you ever met a shoe reviewer? They’re some of the most biased, untrustworthy people I’ve ever had the displeasure of meeting. Shoe reviewers just toe the shoe company line and are never critical of shoes for fear of souring a relationship with a brand. Not me, though. I’m the only credible and honest shoe reviewer there is. You can trust my reviews and my reviews only.
Amendment VII: The Right to civil cases Sue
In Suits for common law running shoes, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty two-hundred dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved.
If you’re paying at least two Benjamin Franklin bills for one pair of shoes, that’s certainly a controversial value and you certainly have the right to bitch and moan about the shoe if it doesn’t live up to your expectations. So, go ahead, put the absurdly priced shoe on blast, and bring it to trial to make the company answer for this running shoe injustice.
Just don’t expect any real justice to be served. The jury won’t be “of your peers”—it’ll be a jury bought and paid for by “Big Running”—not to be confused with “Big Tobacco.” The former supports one of the best activities in the world for your lungs and the latter supports perhaps the worst activity in the world for your lungs. But they’re both equally insufferable.
Amendment VIII: Bails, Payments, Fines, and Punishment
“Excessive bail payments on shoes shall not be required, nor excessive fines prices imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
This amendment is just flat-out hilarious! It contradicts itself at every turn. Literally none of this is accurate.
Let’s start with “excessive payments on shoes shall not be required.” Oh, how very generous of the government! Yes, that would be great, if it were actually true. But unfortunately, companies aren’t following the other part of this amendment that states “nor excessive prices imposed”! This is not a chicken or egg situation—the high prices very clearly come first and then runners are forced to pay them if they want to run in any pair worth a damn. Yes, you heard me—they’re forced to.
As if we even have a choice! What are we going to do—not pay ridiculous sums of money to run in the best shoes available? We’re not morons! Gee, let me see, would I rather run in an $140 pair or a $275 pair?
As if the fact that all good running shoes are unaffordable wasn’t bad enough, the shoes we can afford to buy are some of the most uncomfortable, unattractive, and unforgiving shoes on the market. I’d certainly call that a cruel and unusual punishment. Congrats, government, you failed us on all three counts. Talk about adding insult to injury.
Amendment IX: Rights Retained by the People Runners
There are additional fundamental rights, protected from governmental infringement, which exist alongside those fundamental rights specifically mentioned in the first eight Amendments of Running.
Honestly, I’m a bit confused on this one. So, essentially, this amendment gives runners free reign to do whatever we damn well please that wasn’t explicitly stated in the first eight amendments?! Rock on! Don’t mind if we do! Runners are already some of the most entitled people running—not walking—the face of the earth. Well, we’re about to get a whole lot more insufferable.
Now runners are legally permitted by federal law to run on the wrong side of the road, run in the middle of the road, run without a headlamp or reflective gear when it’s pitch-black outside, run on a busy road with no shoulder when there’s a perfectly good trail running parallel to the busy road with no shoulder, run faster when they’re about to get passed, end a run at public places and subject fellow citizens—legal citizens, the government assures you—to their STANK, and—you get the point. Runners are pigs; not me, though.
Amendment X: States’ Runners’ Rights
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Running Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people runners.
Let’s just focus on the end of this one: it very clearly states that the powers not delegated in the Running Constitution are reserved to the runners. Yet I’m a smidge bewildered by this one, and I’m trying to determine how this tenth amendment differs from the ninth amendment. From what I understand, just like the previous amendment, the tenth amendment gives runners free reign to do whatever we damn well please—yet again! Strange that there are two amendments that state the exact same sentiment, but we’ll take it!
Again, in case you missed the ninth amendment, runners are legally permitted by federal law to run on the wrong side of the road, run in the middle of the road, run without a headlamp or reflective gear when it’s pitch-black outside, run on a busy road with no shoulder when there’s a perfectly good trail running parallel to the busy road with no shoulder, run faster when they’re about to get passed, end a run at public places and subject fellow citizens—legal citizens, the government assures you—to their STANK, and—I thought you got the point? Remember, runners are pigs; not me, though.
