General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsScalia Dissent In Marriage Equality Case Is Even More Unhinged Than You'd Think
Last edited Fri Jun 26, 2015, 11:53 AM - Edit history (1)
Antonin Scalia Dissent In Marriage Equality Case Is Even More Unhinged Than You'd ThinkScalia's dissent in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges, which officially made marriage equality the law of the land, runs for eight pages, but amounts largely to a big, arms-crossed "harumph."
(snip)
"The substance of todays decree is not of immense personal importance to me," he offers. "It is of overwhelming importance, however, who it is that rules me. Todays decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court. Until the courts put a stop to it, public debate over same-sex marriage displayed American democracy at its best."
"But the Court ends this debate, in an opinion lacking even a thin veneer of law," he opines "Buried beneath the mummeries and straining-to-be-memorable passages of the opinion is a candid and startling assertion: No matter what it was the People ratified, the Fourteenth Amendment protects those rights that the Judiciary, in its 'reasoned judgment,' thinks the Fourteenth Amendment ought to protect."
(snip)
"The opinion is couched in a style that is as pretentious as its content is egotistic," he writes. "If, even as the price to be paid for a fifth vote, I ever joined an opinion for the Court that began: 'The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity,' I would hide my head in a bag. The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/26/antonin-scalia-dissent_n_7671110.html
more at link
(snip)
Scalia even offered what may the first legal cite of a hippie.
"'The nature of marriage is that, through its enduring bond, two persons together can find other freedoms, such as expression, intimacy, and spirituality,'" he quoted from the majority opinion before adding, "Really? Who ever thought that intimacy and spirituality (whatever that means) were freedoms? And if intimacy is, one would think Freedom of Intimacy is abridged rather than expanded by marriage. Ask the nearest hippie."
HuffPost went to look for the first hippie we could find, per Scalia's instructions. A 61-year-old man from Alexandria outside the White House, protesting nuclear weapons, said he had come to this very park in the 1970s for pot smoke-ins, but added that there really haven't been hippies around since the Grateful Dead stopped touring. He was nonetheless willing to offer a judgment on Scalia's assertion that marriage abridges rather than expands intimacy. "I've known it to have both reactions," he ruled. "Scalia is a big knucklehead."
ProfessorGAC
(65,466 posts)Really? His ego is 8 orders of magnitude greater than his intellect. He is the most egomaniacal jurist in the country.
And, really there is no amount of "unhingement" that can't be expected from this tool
muntrv
(14,505 posts)luvspeas
(1,883 posts)he seems to find that "refreshing".
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)Response to cal04 (Original post)
Betty Karlson This message was self-deleted by its author.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)Gidney N Cloyd
(19,847 posts)GoCubsGo
(32,103 posts)His rantings just get crazier and crazier with every ruling.
edhopper
(33,667 posts)is his homophobic God.
Glassunion
(10,201 posts)onecaliberal
(33,014 posts)Of the entire country to appoint a POTUS who then went on to screw the country over so badly we are still feeling the effects of that administration.
Chan790
(20,176 posts)I don't suppose that his raving dissent can be used as evidence that he's a stark raving loonie even in apolitical objective terms of psychology? Being mentally-infirm to the point of delusion and dementia is legitimate grounds to remove him from the bench IMO.
First offhand dissertations about orgies, now asserting that marriage is an infringement on intimacy...one gets the impression that Antonin Scalia might be a much more sexually-interesting person than I want to contemplate.