# A moment of your time, please, Justice Scalia **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 24, 2003, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243 "2003-10-24T02:53:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/1 "2003-10-24T02:53:49Z")
[Eat shit and die, whiny motherfucker.](http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20031024/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_scalia_2) You are an associate justice on the United States Supreme Court. You are one of nine. On a regular basis, your vote determines the lives and deaths of your fellow citizens. On a regular basis, your vote is overruled by five or more of your colleagues, and the lives or deaths of your fellow citizens continue in some manner contrary to your judgment. Such is life, you giant fucking pussy. Sorry, Gene, but you lost one earlier this year. Seems a couple of queers from Houston came in front of you and said “Please, U.S. Supreme Court! Tell the state of Texas that they can’t throw us in jail for engaging in consensual intercourse!” And after they said that, you and your colleagues went back into a conference room, and you voted on whether you thought the state of Texas should be able to throw the faggots in jail, and it turned out that you lost that vote, 6-3. When was the last time one of your “liberal political order” colleagues–which include such renowned pinkos as Anthony Kennedy and Sandra Day O’Connor–went in front of a rabidy partisan audience and denounced your gaseous spewings? Is that what you want, asshole? Do you really fucking want every motherfucking vote you cast to become fodder for your fellow judges to publicly masturbate over in front of their adoring throngs? Fuck you. The vote is over Gene-o. You lost. Now suck it up like a big boy, have some motherfucking respect for the institution on which your fat, bigoted ass sits, and shut your damn fool mouth, you reprehensible piece of shit. ---
**Author:** ![Jello](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@Jello](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jello)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/2 "2003-10-24T02:59:48Z")
I had the chance to see the Supreme Court in session last January, for a small portion of the oral arguments in a case on the Family Leave Act. Scalia, alone of the justices, seemed to take a demonic glee in tearing the lawyers apart. It was surreal. Of course, I entered with an anti-Scalia prejudice and left with one. Still, the man looked and sounded utterly evil. He has a great legal mind, but it’s really sad to see it wasted on Neanderthal stances on almost every issue. On the other hand, I’m glad he had the sense to recuse himself from the Pledge of Allegiance case. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/3 "2003-10-24T03:00:06Z")
Isn’t Gene Scalia someone else? You mean Antonin, right? Do I not get the joke? I agree completely about his antics, by the way. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/4 "2003-10-24T03:11:24Z")
Do you _really_ need any further proof that the Undead walk amongst us? ---
**Author:** ![Earl\_of\_Sandwhich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/91b2a8/32.png) [@Earl\_of\_Sandwhich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Earl_of_Sandwhich)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/5 "2003-10-24T03:31:22Z")
Eugene Scalia is Antonin’s son. I don’t particularly like Justice Scalia either. ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/6 "2003-10-24T03:33:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Jimmy Chitwood \* > Isn’t Gene Scalia someone else? You mean Antonin, right? Sorry, I went for the nickname and substituted the son for the father. Just goes to prove my theory that I can’t possibly post a rant without messing up some detail. But on the big picture, I’m clear. May your prostate rise up and strangle your coal-back heart while you sleep, Mr. Scalia. ---
**Author:** ![wakimika](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f08c70/32.png) [@wakimika](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wakimika)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/7 "2003-10-24T03:41:49Z")
Whoa, look out. Scalia’s lap dog Clarence is headed for that soft spot on your calf. ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/8 "2003-10-24T03:48:08Z")
To the contrary, Clarence Thomas has ordinarily been quite reserved in his public comments on the Court’s decisions. I disagree with many of his votes, but I have no complaint about him as a public masturbator. ---
**Author:** ![cmason32](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@cmason32](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmason32)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/9 "2003-10-24T03:53:14Z")
I hate Scalia. IMO, the guy cares more about his ideology than the Constitution. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/10 "2003-10-24T04:02:28Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by minty green_ > I disagree with many of his votes, but I have no complaint about him as a public masturbator. Oh, fuck, that was too funny. Best rant I’ve read in a month. ---
**Author:** ![El\_Cid\_Viscoso](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/41988e/32.png) [@El\_Cid\_Viscoso](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Cid_Viscoso)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/11 "2003-10-24T04:40:50Z")
Yeah, eat me, Scalia, you morbific podesta of closeted concupiscence! ---
**Author:** ![Beagle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/85f322/32.png) [@Beagle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beagle)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/12 "2003-10-24T04:47:21Z")
The real story here is that Scalia is hanging himself one speech at a time. He is going to have to recuse himself from everything at this rate. Or, he will be ridiculed. Oh, wait… ---
**Author:** ![El\_Cid\_Viscoso](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/41988e/32.png) [@El\_Cid\_Viscoso](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Cid_Viscoso)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/13 "2003-10-24T04:53:12Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Beagle \* > > The real story here is that Scalia is hanging himself one speech at a time… Well, at last he’s got his hay-bale wish. He’s finally well-hung. ---
**Author:** ![schplebordnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/91b2a8/32.png) [@schplebordnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/schplebordnik)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/14 "2003-10-24T04:54:52Z")
“I hate Scalia. IMO, the guy cares more about his ideology than the Constitution.” Yeah, how could he have missed the section of Constitution that says that states have no right to pass their own criminal laws? ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 5:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/15 "2003-10-24T05:08:57Z")
Gee, **schplebordnik** , could a state make it a crime for gays to vote? There are limits, ya know. Just let the justice keep talking. He has a right to express his opinions. And when they are so blatantly biased about upcoming cases, he has the right to realize how stupid he has been and recuse himself from those cases too. It’s like what Beagle said. Only I wanted to say it and he beat me to it. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Enderw24](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ba9def/32.png) [@Enderw24](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enderw24)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/16 "2003-10-24T05:22:54Z")
Scalia came to my law school a year and a half ago. The first question right out of the gate was a student quoting numerous scathing sentences in various opinions that Scalia had made about his fellow justices. Scalia was quick to point out that, no, he never ever attacks the justices. He merely attacks ideas. And if an idea happens to be stupid, he has no qualms in saying so. He also mentioned quite emphatically, that there has never been an argument of a personal nature behind the closed doors of deliberation. Well, I guess only 9 people know for sure. Me, I’m kinda doubting that. I did find it amusing that EVERY SINGLE QUESTION somehow related to the founding fathers. Talk about a one trick pony. Search and seizure? Founding fathers knew the answer. Copyright laws? Founding fathers knew the answer Animal sex using the constitution as a cumrag? Founding fathers knew the answer. I even got to ask him a question. I asked whether he interprets each case within the vacuum of the court or whether he looks towards the larger social and political effects the outcome of the case would create. Yes, somehow even THAT dealt with the founding fathers. Don’t ask me how. I couldn’t follow it. I think Scalia’s biggest problem is that he seems to be under some delusion that he’s living in Philidelphia, in 1776. Had white-out been invented, Scalia would undoubtably have used it on certain parts of the document before signing his name larger than John Hancock. Yes. I know, that’s the DoI. Scalia still would have signed his name to it in 72 point font. ---
**Author:** ![Doomtrain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/0ea827/32.png) [@Doomtrain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Doomtrain)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/17 "2003-10-24T05:42:37Z")
Hmm, why do I get the feeling Scalia would be happily joining in with the “Cool, Cool Conservative Men” song/dance number in Philly '76? At least the future Mr. Feeney could smack him around some… ---
**Author:** ![cmason32](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@cmason32](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmason32)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/18 "2003-10-24T05:50:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by schplebordnik \* > \*\*“I hate Scalia. IMO, the guy cares more about his ideology than the Constitution.” > > Yeah, how could he have missed the section of Constitution that says that states have no right to pass their own criminal laws? \*\* I was talking about Scalia in general, I wasn’t commenting on any specific decision of his. Would you argue that Scalia doesn’t have a specific ideology? ---
**Author:** ![schplebordnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/91b2a8/32.png) [@schplebordnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/schplebordnik)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 7:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/19 "2003-10-24T07:01:51Z")
Yes, as do the the Justices who wrote the majority decision in Lawrence. Scalia would tell you that his ideology is one that respects the Constitution, and in particular the way that it enumerates certain civil rights that the federal and state governments may not abridge, and leaves the rest to the people to decide. And the subject matter at issue in Lawrence is not an enumerated civil right, hence the people of Texas can proscribe it. How is that not respect for the text of the Constitution over ideology. And can the state of Texas make it a crime for gay people to vote? Sure, if they are convicted felons. Otherwise, voting, being an enumerated civil right, may not be abridged. ---
**Author:** ![cmason32](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@cmason32](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmason32)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 7:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243/20 "2003-10-24T07:27:20Z")
I found something that responds to your point better than anything I could write, so I’m going to post that > [@](#): > > The second problem with Scalia’s use of originalism is that it is opportunistic. Scalia invokes originalist arguments when they support constitutional positions he agrees with; but when they would be an embarassment to the positions he likes, he says nothing about originalism, instead using fairly standard arguments based on precedent, social policy, and his favored values. You may remember that a week before Lawrence came down the Supreme Court decided the Michigan affirmative action cases. Neither Scalia nor Thomas said anything in their opinions about the original understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment in those cases, nor, to my knowledge has either seriously engaged with that history in any of their opinions on race relations. But that history sheds some degree of doubt on whether colorblindness is the operative meaning of the 14th amendment’s section one, at least as originally understood by its framers. (And indeed, although it is certainly not conclusive proof, the Congress that passed the 14th amendment engaged in race conscious affirmative action in providing educational and social welfare benefits for blacks, including blacks who were not newly freed. (See Jed Rubenfeld’s 1997 article in Yale Law Journal on this body of legislation.). This legislation was in addition to the Freedman’s Bureau acts, which can be understood as either race conscious or race neutral depending on your interpretation of them. The history of Congressional affirmative action is not conclusive proof because Congress was not bound by the 14th Amendment, but then of course, on that line of argument, it’s unclear how either Scalia or Thomas could have joined the Adarand decision. > > Stare decisis must temper originalism, and that is how many non originalist decisions like Bolling v. Sharpe (and Adarand) might be justified for an originalist. The problem is that originalists like Scalia do not consistently follow precedent when it conflicts with original understandings, nor do they consistently follow original understandings when they conflict with precedent. Rather, they pick and choose, depending on which constitutional rules they like better. It is unlikely that Scalia > would vote to overturn Bolling v. Sharpe, but he would love to overturn precedents like Roe, Casey, Stenberg, Eisenstadt, and Carey. He defers to previous precedent (or expands on it) when it suits him, and he waxes eloquent about returning to the original understanding when that suits > him. And all the while he insists that people who disagree with him are > making illegitimate arguments, and are imposing their personal preferences > on the Constitution. The irony is that when originalism is opportunistically applied in the way that Scalia employs it, it allows judges to do pretty much the same thing as the judges that Scalia > criticizes. In this sense, Scalia’s brand of originalism fails to perform the very function he says it should perform: the function of constraining judges. Having seen Scalia’s body of work since he joined the Court, I have no reason to believe that Scalia is any more constrained from pushing the Constitution in his preferred direction using an artful combination of > textual, originalist, and precedental arguments than William Brennan > was. Scalia is the living constitutionalist who dares not admit that his is a living constitutionalism of the right rather than of the left. [http://www.mail-archive.com/conlawprof@listserv.ucla.edu/msg00814.html](http://www.mail-archive.com/conlawprof@listserv.ucla.edu/msg00814.html) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-moment-of-your-time-please-justice-scalia/209243.md?page=2)