Another week, another installation of both excellence and abominations in shade. Welcome back, all.

In this week's Shade Court Rudy Giuliani is cranky and annoying, a reader questions if they've been shaded by their boss and a football player attempts a shade home run.

Shade Court Docket #2015JZ000044

The Case: Rudy Giuliani is continuing to run his mouth in public forums because he still hasn't gotten enough recognition for singlehandedly dealing with 9/11 all on his very, very own. Most of what he's been saying has been extremely stupid. One of his dumbest comments occurred at a fundraiser for Scott Walker where Rudy Giuliani proclaimed that the President of the United States doesn't love the United States.

Advertisement

The Defendant: GQ

The Evidence:

Advertisement

The Deliberation: The ability to throw shade necessarily requires you to have some semblance of a sense of humor. Therefore, Rudy Giuliani is obviously immediately disqualified from contention. He is a cranky old man who still hasn't come to terms with the fact that he is never ever ever ever ever ever going to be President. Can it, Rudolph, and do your research, GQ.

The Ruling: Not shade

Shade Court Docket #2015JZ000045

Advertisement

The Case: This case comes from a reader who we'll call Henry. Henry is a 20-something living in Brooklyn, working for a small organization in the city. After recounting a recent interaction at work, Henry worries that he might have been the receiver of shade from the sarcastic lips of his boss.

The Defendant: Henry's manager

The Evidence:

The other day, my manager was talking with the director of my organization - a posh UES type - about needing to take time off work to go check on his property in Florida. My director nodded politely and, looking my way, sighed, "We all have to do that from time to time, don't we?"

Advertisement

The Deliberation: Let's just all take a moment to do the jerking off motion for Henry's manager, because shut the hell up, dude. Nobody cares about your fancy house in the worst state in the country.

Shade was indeed thrown, dear Henry, but it wasn't at you. The comment your director made seems to be shade directed towards this obnoxious manager.

I respect the director's use of the word "we." People who say "we" when they know good and goddamn well that the situation only calls for an "I" or "you" are preparing you for something shady to come. There is a bit more sarcasm in his comment than I'd like, but judging by the way Henry describes his tone, it seems like he deadpanned well enough to qualify.

Advertisement

The Ruling: Shade

Shade Court Docket #2015JZ000046

Advertisement

The Case: In an interview with V Magazine, Chloe Sevigny was (probably) goaded into discussing other successful white women in Hollywood. In a response about some of her favorite women in film, she said the following:

"I love when a movie star is a great movie star, I think Angelina is a great movie star… I like Emma Stone. Whenever she's herself, she's really cute. Jennifer Lawrence I find annoying. Too crass."

The Defendant: Perez Hilton/MTV UK/Everyone

The Evidence:

Advertisement

The Deliberation: This is an interesting case. The misguided bloggers over at MTV UK and Perez Hilton all assert that Chole is shading Jennifer Lawrence because she directed the most obvious insult towards the Hunger Games star. They did that because they don't know what the hell they're talking about and because they have no business using the word "shade."

However, Chloe Sevigny did, in fact, throw shade at someone‚ÄĒit just wasn't Jennifer Lawrence.

Advertisement

Everyone is ignoring her line about Emma Stone: "I like Emma Stone. Whenever she's herself, she's really cute."

That's an interesting caveat for someone whose job is to pretend to be someone other than herself. We sort of have to assume that when Emma Stone is onscreen she's not exactly being herself, right? It would help to hear how exactly Chloe Sevigny said that line because inflection can make or break shade. Either way, it's infinitely more shady than her quip about Jennifer Lawrence.

The Ruling: Not shade

Shade Court Docket #2015JZ000047

Advertisement

The Case: There was quite a bit of NFL activity earlier this week with a flurry of trades and contracts and whatevers. One special snowflake in that storm was the New Orleans Saints trading away Jimmy Graham to the Seattle Seahawks.

Following the news, Saints quarterback Drew Brees tweeted the following photo.

Advertisement

The Defendant: Bleacher Report

The Evidence:

Advertisement

The Deliberation: Before we get into the actual usage of shade here, I have to address the language choices in this header. Semantics matter, people. "Sending Mad Shade?" Listen bro, I get that you're writing for a sports site, but that is not going to cut it.

You don't send shade‚ÄĒyou throw shade. Or, you simply shade someone. I'm surprised the writer didn't go with throwing shade‚ÄĒHELLO THROWING! That's a sports word! Not sporty enough for you, dude? "Sending Mad Shade" is an abomination of a phrase and I don't want to ever see any fuckery like that in my courtroom again.

Now, on to the matter at hand. Despite the writer's earlier confusion, this is indeed an excellent showing by Drew Brees. Using children to do your dirty work for you? I love it. Look at this adorable child wearing that tiny, adorable Jimmy Graham jersey. It's almost like Drew Brees is saying to the Saints organization: "Do you want to break the news to him that his favorite player has been sent across the the country?"

Advertisement

As we've learned from Beyonc√©, a simple picture with no caption is an exceptional way to throw shade‚ÄĒpictures being worth a thousand words and all. I like your style, Drew.

The Ruling: Shade

Images via Getty, 20th Century Fox; Top image by Tara Jacoby, featuring the shade artist at a young age.