Doesn’t Scalia have a lawn to protect somewhere? He seems to be deteriorating into ranting.
Pure applesauce.
In school, most of my applied math profs used the term “jiggery-pokery” to describe any sequence of mathematical manipulations that aren’t important enough to discuss, and I’ve picked up occasional use of the phrase to mean the same thing. I didn’t realize that it was supposed to mean deceitful fiddling around instead of just unimportant fiddling around.
Resolution: Denied
Apparently, Scalia’s vocabulary is larger than yours. That doesn’t make him a bad guy.
*jiggery–pokery -
noun jig·gery–pok·ery \ˈji-gər-ē-ˈpō-kər-ē\
: dishonest or suspicious activity
Full Definition of JIGGERY-POKERY
: underhanded manipulation or dealings : trickery*
*See jiggery–pokery defined for English-language learners -
Learner’s definition of JIGGERY–POKERY
[noncount] British, informal
: dishonest or suspicious activity
There’s some jiggery-pokery [=hanky-panky] going on behind the scenes.*
Regardless of what I might think of Scalia’s politics, I chuckle every time I encounter the phrase “jiggery-pokery”. For some reason, it’s just hilarious to me.
No, that’s not what makes him a bad guy. He is, however, a dishonest old crank with bad politics and a very strange view of the law. Jon Stewart did a real nice job last night pointing out that Scalia is against the court throwing out laws like marriage bans but has no problem throwing out popular laws like the Voting Rights Act. He’s a douche. I wouldn’t mind him staying on the court a while longer if we can get two or three more adults on the court to insure Scalia will always be in the minority on important questions.
From my foreign viewpoint the only grown up on the US Supreme Court is John Roberts. Everyone else seems to have basically given up even the pretense of being jurists.
Scalia incidentally is a good example of why a there should be retirement ages for judges, the guy is increasingly unhinged, this is sad, considering in his day, he was brilliant.
Bahhh…
Word usage like that embiggens us all.
I think Roberts is just trying to get his name disassociated from the old conservative issues so he can be just as biased on new issues in the future. We’re stuck with him for a very long time. The most important legislation we need now is a way to get rid of these old corrupt bastards. I propose of a term of 2 years times the number of justices, so currently 18 years, and the CJ will be the senior justice for the remainder of his term. Too bad I won’t live long enough to see that or any other change to lifetime appointments.
Objection! Asserts facts not in evidence.
Eh, SCOTUS opinions have always been a little whimsical. A few weeks ago, Kagan put a bunch of Spiderman references in a case in which Marvel was one of the parties. I don’t think it hurts anything, and will give future law-students something to cheer them up from their otherwise bleak existences.
Part of the audience for the opinion is future lawyers and justices. Memorable opinions are more influential. I generally think Justice Thomas has slightly better legal reasoning, but Scalia’s opinions are more fun to read and more memorable.
Is 'jiggery poker" a precise legal term? I like the opinion on lethal injection-it might “cause a painful death”…I’m shocked, shocked, I tell ya.
At least he didn’t say ‘niggardly’.
Disgaree, The Economist had a very good write up about him this week.
He’s appointed for life. Why can’t he be just as biased on any issues he wants right now as well?
Jon Stewart? The comedian? If Stewart made you laugh, that’s all that’s really important. 
If he makes me laugh at Scalia, he’s done his job. Agreed.
It’s a subscription site, but I’m interested to find out what they say.
The legacy thing, and he knows some of the old issues are losers. He wants to shape the court going forward instead of being known for maintaining the intractability on past issues. That’s my opinion of course, he hasn’t responded to my emails on the subject
Without commenting on any legal aspects of the case, I have been rather amused by the number of people commenting on the phrase “jiggery-pokery” as if it’s some nonsense coinage that Scalia made up out of thin air. On The Nightly Show, Larry Wilmore even wondered (perhaps jokingly) if it was vaguely racist.
“Jiggery-pokery” is a pretty well established slang term meaning something like “cheating or trickery,” although I admit that its usage does seem to be mostly British. But I had certainly heard it before. It’s been used in Doctor Who, and it’s been used in Harry Potter, long before Scalia ever said it. Who knows, maybe Scalia has an unsuspected fondness for British SF and Fantasy.
But yeah, there’s enough to criticize Scalia for without a criticism that essentially amounts to, “He knows a word that I didn’t! What a loser!”