Tag Archives: Antonin Scalia

What did we learn from Antonin Scalia’s death?

By Jim Hightower, 3/8/16

How curious that Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia died in, of all places, an exclusive, West Texas hunting lodge.

Curioser yet, all expenses for hizzonor’s February stay were paid by the lodge’s owner, John Poindexter. He’s a Houston manufacturing mogul who had won a favorable ruling from the Court in an age-discrimination case last year. In another curiosity, the names of some 35 other people who were in Scalia’s hunting party are being kept secret. Moreover, the late judge (an ardent promoter of corporate supremacy over people’s rights) was flown to the Texas getaway for free aboard someone’s or some corporations’ private jet, but the name of this generous benefactor has also been withheld. Curious, huh?

This is not a murder mystery – by all accounts, Scalia died of natural causes. Rather it’s a moral mystery. Who was buying (or repaying) favors from such an enormously-powerful member of America’s highest court?…

continue reading at Jim Hightower

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, justice

Is Scalia a Troll?

By William Boardman, Reader Supported News, 03 March 13

Why does Justice Scalia hate the Constitution? And is he a troll?

15TH AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION

[Ratified February 3, 1870]

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Congress’s 2006 renewal of the 1965 Voting Rights Act was the subject of 76 minutes of oral argument before the U.S. Supreme Court in February, although Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, 77, gave the impression that he thought the legislation was really called the Voting Entitlement Act.

Early in the hearing on a frequently non-compliant Alabama county’s appeal of the Voting Rights Act, Scalia tried leading Alabama’s counsel into agreeing to a specious conclusion by citing the 1965 Senate vote of 79-18 to pass the act, compared to the Senate’s 2006 unanimous 98-0 vote to renew the act.

“It must have been even clearer in 2006 that these States were violating the Constitution,” Scalia said. “Don’t you think that’s true?”

“No,” said the Alabama counsel, “I think the court has to …–”

Associate Justice Elena Kagan, 53, interrupted, tongue in cheek: “Well that sounds like a good argument to me, Justice Scalia. It was clear to 98 Senators, including every Senator from a covered state, who decided that there was a continuing need for this piece of legislation.”

“Or decided that perhaps they’d better not vote against it,” Scalia answered, “that there’s nothing, that there’s no –… none of their interests in voting against it.”

Justices Avoid Discussing Psychic Powers

“I don’t know what they’re thinking,” said Associate Justice Stephen Breyer, 75, as he changed the subject from Scalia’s speculation based, apparently, on retrospective, paranoid mindreading of those voting Senators in 2006.

But Scalia was back a few minutes later, this time trying to lead the government’s counsel, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli: “You could always say, oh, there has been improvement, but the only reason there has been improvement are these extraordinary procedures [the Voting Rights Act] that deny the States sovereign powers which the Constitution preserves to them. So, since the only reason it’s [voting non-discrimination] improved is because of these procedures, we must continue those procedures in perpetuity.”

Verrilli: “No.”

Scalia: “Is that the argument you are making?”

Verrilli: “That is not the argument. We do not think that —-”

Scalia: “I thought that was the argument you were just making.”

Verrilli: “It is not….”

Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., 58, jumped in here to state that Massachusetts “has the worst ratio of white voter turnout to African American voter turnout,” but that the best ratio is in Mississippi. It wasn’t clear what point he was making.

Massachusetts Rebuts Roberts’s Slur

Roberts’s assertion was apparently false, according to Massachusetts secretary of state William Galvin, who commented on WBUR radio on March 1:

“I’m disturbed, first of all, that he is distorting information. You would expect better conduct from the chief justice of the United States. I’m a lawyer, he’s a lawyer, lawyers are not supposed to provide disinformation in the course of a case. It’s supposed to be based on truth….

keep reading and follow links at Reader Supported News

Leave a comment

Filed under Race, Ethnicity, Immigration, Rights, Justice, Law

Justice Scalia Should Quit

EJ Dionne Jr, Washington Post, 6/27/12

Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia. Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia. (Photo: Stephen Masker)Washington – Justice Antonin Scalia needs to resign from the Supreme Court.

He’d have a lot of things to do. He’s a fine public speaker and teacher. He’d be a heck of a columnist and blogger. But he really seems to aspire to being a politician — and that’s the problem.

So often, Scalia has chosen to ignore the obligation of a Supreme Court justice to be, and appear to be, impartial. He’s turned “judicial restraint” into an oxymoronic phrase. But what he did this week, when the court announced its decision on the Arizona immigration law, should be the end of the line.

Not content with issuing a fiery written dissent, Scalia offered a bench statement questioning President Obama’s decision to allow some immigrants who were brought to the United States illegally as children to stay. Obama’s move had nothing to do with the case in question. Scalia just wanted you to know where he stood….

continue reading at Washington Post

Leave a comment

Filed under Rights, Justice, Law