I may in the not too distant future have a chance to ask Justice Scalia a question at lecture he is giving. If you could ask one question of Justice Scalia what would it be?
I think the question and answer part of the lecture will be open ended. However, the lecture will be on standing and seperation of powers. And it goes without saying the question will have to be respectful.
Ask him to define impartiality. And if it’s possible to be impartial when you socialize with a defendent in a complaint that his court is supposed to decide.
With the greatest respect:
Separation of Powers: Wartime;
Deference or
Oversight.
Striking the balance?
So, is Thomas your bitch or what?
How about this?
[spoiler]Why don't you eat shit and die!![/spoiler] Would an atheist society have a law system similar to ours? Why would it be different?
Does anybody on the Court subscribe to the theory that the Second Amendment pertains to individuals?
Does he think a large standing army gives the President the de facto power to violate the separation of powers by making it way too easy for him to make war on whomever he wants, whenever he wants, wherever he wants, regardless of the will of Congress? And, therefore, might it be advisable to put in place something stronger than the current clause making Congress reauthorize a standing army at least once every two years?
I’d ask his opinion on the history of the court’s interpretation of the commerce clause, before, during, and after the “New Deal”.
Boxers or briefs?
No, seriously I’d ask him what his interpreattion of the 2nd ammendment is. How does the introductory clause affect it. What does “arms” mean, does that mean everything including bazookas and atom bombs are allowed? If not, how does this square with original intent.
Ask him under what circumstances he believes the Court should overturn its own established precedent.
Just don’t ask a “gotcha” question. That’s juvenile and won’t result in an informative answer anyways. I like the questions suggested by minty and mks57.
It would be interesting to hear what he thought about the constitutionality of the War Powers Resolution.
So, will you be retiring any time soon? :wally
Here’s a serious one. It should be a no-brainer, but apparently it’s not for some people:
When the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the President belong to the same political party, is the Chairman obligated to get any and all Supreme Court nominees through committee, and why or why not?
I can’t think of any way to ask this question in a respectable manner, but it’s baffled me ever since he gave his dissent in Lawrence vs. Texas:
Does he really think laws against masturbation are a good thing?
Scalia’s here today and there’s been some discussion of what he can’t and can’t talk about, both in the classes he is teaching and in his lecture later this afternoon. Anyway, our local paper gave one distinction:
*Can students discuss the duckhunting flap involving Scalia and Vice President Dick Cheney in January of this year? Yes and no.
You can’t ask about discussions Scalia may have had with his colleagues in deciding to hear a case involving Cheney a few months after the hunting trip, [Dean] Caminker says. But he adds, “Students could ask about the legal principles Justice Scalia used to decide that he need not recuse himself, and could certainly ask whether he bagged any ducks.” *
Heh.
Orgies? Orgies??
Now, now! Conservatives are sexual beings too even if we might not want to imagine it in many cases.
I wonder- did Thurgood Marshall EVER disagree with William Brennan on a case of any importance, and did you ever ask if Marshall was Brennan’s bitch?
No, no, I’m sorry- THAT was obviously just great minds thinking alike.
Scalia would undoubtedly respond that it doesn’t matter whether he thinks they are a “good thing” for purposes of his job. His job is only to determine whether such laws are unconstitutional.