WaPo:

The Supreme Court ruled narrowly Tuesday in favor of a government policy that threatens broadcasters with fines over the use of even a single curse word on live television, yet stopped short of deciding whether the policy violates the Constitution.

Um... I thought deciding whether or not shit violates the Constitution was the Supreme Court's job. Isn't that the reason people appeal to the Supreme Court?

The Washington Post notes that under the Bush administration the FCC changed its "one-free-expletive rule," which had allowed broadcasters to get away with an unscripted "shit" or "fuck" during, say, an awards show or some other live broadcast. Bush's FCC concluded that airwaves had to be kept expletive-free to protect "children... likely to be watching television." Maybe. But there's no excuse for the Washington Post to use constructions like "the F-word" and "the S-word" in place of "fuck" and "shit." Children may be watching television, WaPo, but children are not reading news stories about Supreme Court decisions—and adults don't need to be protected from "fuck" and "shit" and resent being treated like children by the Washington Post.