Scalia: Abortion, death penalty "easy" cases

[markomalley]

From CBS:
Justice Antonin Scalia says his method of interpreting the Constitution makes some of the most hotly disputed issues that come before the Supreme Court among the easiest to resolve.

Scalia calls himself a “textualist” and, as he related to a few hundred people who came to buy his new book and hear him speak in Washington the other day, that means he applies the words in the Constitution as they were understood by the people who wrote and adopted them.

So Scalia parts company with former colleagues who have come to believe capital punishment is unconstitutional. The framers of the Constitution didn’t think so and neither does he.

"The death penalty? Give me a break. It’s easy. Abortion? Absolutely easy. Nobody ever thought the Constitution prevented restrictions on abortion. Homosexual sodomy? Come on. For 200 years, it was criminal in every state," Scalia said at the American Enterprise Institute.

Such clarity of thought is sadly not all that common these days.

Sadly.

 

[austenbosten]

I love Justice Scalia…he’s my favorite Supreme Court Justice and is Catholic too

My favorite line of his in regards to government surveillance technology “It’s un-Constitutional if it’s scary.”

 

[_Abyssinia]

Scalia interview with Piers Morgan

Roe v wade

My view is regardless of whether you think prohibiting abortion is good or whether you think prohibiting abortion is bad, regardless of how you come out on that, my only point is the Constitution does not say anything about it. It leaves it up to democratic choice.

Some states prohibited it, some states didn’t. What Roe v. Wade – Wade said was that no state can prohibit it. That is simply not in the Constitution. It was one of those many things – most things in the world – left to democratic choice. And – and the court does – does not do democracy a favor when it takes an issue out of democratic choice…

_

Just as the pro-choice people say the Constitution prohibits the banning of abortion, so, also, the pro-life people say the opposite. They say that the Constitution requires the banning of abortion, because you’re depriving someone of life without due process of law.

I reject that argument just as I reject the other one. The Constitution, in fact, says nothing at all about the subject. It is left to democratic choice.

Now, regardless of what my views as a Catholic are, the Constitution says nothing about it.

Death penalty

I – I’m not pro. People – I don’t insist that there be a death penalty. All I insist upon is that the American people never proscribed the death penalty, never adopted a Constitution which said that states cannot have the death penalty.

If you don’t like the death penalty, fine. Some states have abolished it. You’re quite wrong that it’s a majority. It’s a small minority of the states that have – that have abolished it. The majority still – still permit it.

But I’m not pro death penalty. I – I’m just anti the notion that it is not a matter for democratic choice, that it has been taken away from the democratic choice of the people by a provision of the Constitution.

 

[Swiss_Guy]

Scalia interview with Piers Morgan

Roe v wade

Death penalty

So he’s basically saying things should be left to the states?

 

[thewanderer]

So he’s basically saying things should be left to the states?

no, just that it is not unconstitutional so the people should be left the freedom to vote it in if they want to.

 

[Catholic80]

I love Justice Scalia…he’s my favorite Supreme Court Justice and is Catholic too

My favorite line of his in regards to government surveillance technology “It’s un-Constitutional if it’s scary.”

Did you know his son is a priest! Gotta love that!

 

[Dawnia]

I love Justice Scalia…he’s my favorite Supreme Court Justice and is Catholic too

My favorite line of his in regards to government surveillance technology “It’s un-Constitutional if it’s scary.”

He’s my favorite judge too. Now all the rest of those judges need to recognize his brilliance.

 

[austenbosten]

He’s my favorite judge too. Now all the rest of those judges need to recognize his brilliance.

Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito do and they are both Catholic too

 

[Trader]

He’s my favorite judge too. Now all the rest of those judges need to recognize his brilliance.

He can be quite funny too. In 2001 he was the guest of honor at our Red Mass. This was only three weeks after the 9/11 attacks and about one quarter of the public servants on the cathedral grounds were security people. He complemented our choir and said it was the second fanciest Mass he had ever attended. He would not say what was #1.

If a Supreme Court justice says we were good, do we have to listen to the choir director when he says the opposite?

 

[austenbosten]

He can be quite funny too. In 2001 he was the guest of honor at our Red Mass. This was only three weeks after the 9/11 attacks and about one quarter of the public servants on the cathedral grounds were security people. He complemented our choir and said it was the second fanciest Mass he had ever attended. He would not say what was #1.

If a Supreme Court justice says we were good, do we have to listen to the choir director when he says the opposite?

You got to see Justice Scalia in person?

http://ts2.mm.bing.net/th?id=I.5030949325898833&pid=15.1

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

He’s my favorite judge too. Now all the rest of those judges need to recognize his brilliance.

I don’t see much brilliance in a judge which very publicly declares that he’s already decided cases before he’s even heard the opening arguments. Hello Bar Association.

 

[austenbosten]

I don’t see much brilliance in a judge which very publicly declares that he’s already decided cases before he’s even heard the opening arguments. Hello Bar Association.

I guess that means Sotomayor, Kagan, and Ginsberg are the opposite of brilliance.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

I guess that means Sotomayor, Kagan, and Ginsberg are the opposite of brilliance.

Have they publicly declared that they have decided cases they haven’t even heard yet? I think that accusation warrants a source.

 

[Dawnia]

I don’t see much brilliance in a judge which very publicly declares that he’s already decided cases before he’s even heard the opening arguments. Hello Bar Association.

You just need better glasses.

 

[rlg94086]

I don’t see much brilliance in a judge which very publicly declares that he’s already decided cases before he’s even heard the opening arguments. Hello Bar Association.

He didn’t mention a case, so your accusation is false. What he explained is what the Constitution contains regarding abortion and the death penalty. I realize you may prefer justices who aren’t sure what the Constitution contains…

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

He didn’t mention a case, so your accusation is false. What he explained is what the Constitution contains regarding abortion and the death penalty. I realize you may prefer justices who aren’t sure what the Constitution contains…

We know and he knows which cases are pending before the Supreme Court and he has made his position on those issues publicly known prior to even hearing those cases. He should be investigated at the very least.

 

[rlg94086]

We know and he knows which cases are pending before the Supreme Court and he has made his position on those issues publicly known prior to even hearing those cases. He should be investigated at the very least.

Go for it. Good luck on that. You would fail as miserably as your assessment of him has failed, but I highly encourage you to move forward with it.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

Go for it. Good luck on that. You would fail as miserably as your assessment of him has failed, but I highly encourage you to move forward with it.

You think the Republicans would launch a hearing into the ethics of their judge?

 

[rlg94086]

You think the Republicans would launch a hearing into the ethics of their judge?

I didn’t ask Republicans too. I am challenging you to put up or shut up. Put your money where your mouth is. Start a movement to get him removed. Do something bold.

I doubt you will do it, because you know you are wrong. It’s just easy for you to make such allegations knowing they are meaningless.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

I doubt you will do it, because you know you are wrong. It’s just easy for you to make such allegations knowing they are meaningless.

I know I am right. The man partied with the Koch brothers before the Citizens United decision. He went hunting with and was wined and dined by Cheney during the big case he was involved in which wound up before the Supreme Court. Now he has publicly declared his bias. Unfortunately he can only be taken down by Congress which won’t happen under Republican leadership.