Scalia's Dissent In Marriage Equality Case Is Even More Unhinged Than You'd Think

[hazlnut]

Antonin Scalia Dissent In Marriage Equality Case Is Even More Unhinged Than You'd Think

Switched over to Fox News this morning, you know, for shits and giggles and they could't stop talking about Scalia's Dissent. However, every time they quoted it, there was no mention of law or precedent or any type of logical argument in the form of a traditional dissenting opinion, just personal attacks and mindless rambling.

Very shameful to see a long-time justice on this nations highest court act this way.

"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."

At least he admitted that the case was very personal to him, alluding to his traditional Catholic beliefs. Unfortunately, the SCOTUS functions as a secular body, reason and logic trump Jewish fairy tales and a collection of letters written by the followers of Christ. (the bible)


Does he ever make an argument against the majority opinion or does he just attack his colleagues like child?

I believe the Scalia and Thomas are well beyond their prime. Scalia may be in early stages of dementia.

It's interesting to note how the much older Ginsberg is still more articulate than ever.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The Onion nails Scalia in this parody!

Scalia Thomas Roberts Alito Suddenly Realize They Will Be Villains In Oscar-Winning Movie One Day - The Onion - America s Finest News Source

Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Alito Suddenly Realize They Will Be Villains In Oscar-Winning Movie One Day

“Oh, God, the major social ramifications, the political intrigue, all the important people involved in the case—I’m going to be played by some sinister character actor in a drama with tons of award buzz, aren’t I?” said Scalia, joining his fellow dissenting justices in realizing they would be antagonists in a film potentially titled Defense Of Marriage and probably written by Tony Kushner. “I’m going to be portrayed as a closed-minded Neanderthal and the very symbol of backward thinking.

 

[Hossfly]

Antonin Scalia Dissent In Marriage Equality Case Is Even More Unhinged Than You'd Think

Switched over to Fox News this morning, you know, for shits and giggles and they could't stop talking about Scalia's Dissent. However, every time they quoted it, there was no mention of law or precedent or any type of logical argument in the form of a traditional dissenting opinion, just personal attacks and mindless rambling.

Very shameful to see a long-time justice on this nations highest court act this way.

"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."

At least he admitted that the case was very personal to him, alluding to his traditional Catholic beliefs. Unfortunately, the SCOTUS functions as a secular body, reason and logic trump Jewish fairy tales and a collection of letters written by the followers of Christ. (the bible)


Does he ever make an argument against the majority opinion or does he just attack his colleagues like child?

I believe the Scalia and Thomas are well beyond their prime. Scalia may be in early stages of dementia.

It's interesting to note how the much older Ginsberg is still more articulate than ever.

Scalia has all his shit in one pile.

Scalia: 'This Court' is a ‘Threat to American Democracy’
By Terence P. Jeffrey | June 26, 2015 | 10:52 AM EDT
9K
Shares
FacebookTwitterMore

Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Anthony Kennedy, and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
(CNSNews.com) - In his dissent from the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which declared that same-sex marriage was a right, Justice Antonin Scalia declared that this Supreme Court has become a “threat to American democracy.

“I write separately to call attention to this Court’s threat to American democracy,” Scalia said.

“This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.”

Here is an excerpt of a key passage from Scalia’s decion:

I write separately to call attention to this Court’s threat to American democracy.

The substance of today’s decree is not of immense personal importance to me. The law can recognize as marriage whatever sexual attachments and living arrangements it wishes, and can accord them favorable civil consequences, from tax treatment to rights of inheritance.

Those civil consequences—and the public approval that conferring the name of marriage evidences—can perhaps have adverse social effects, but no more adverse than the effects of many other controversial laws. So it is not of special importance to me what the law says about marriage. It is of overwhelming importance, however, who it is that rules me. Today’s 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. The opinion in these cases is the furthest extension in fact—and the furthest extension one can even imagine—of the Court’s claimed power to create “liberties” that the Constitution and its Amendments neglect to mention. This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.


Scalia This Court is a Threat to American Democracy

 

[Derideo_Te]

Scalia has all his shit in one pile.

That giant flushing sound you are hearing is Scalia's pile disappearing down the sewer.

Scalia is being dishonest because equal rights cannot be denied simply because a majority of people don't like what someone says on a message board or does in their bedroom.

And yes, he has once again proven by his own words why he is no longer qualified to sit on that bench.

 

[Hossfly]

Scalia has all his shit in one pile.

That giant flushing sound you are hearing is Scalia's pile disappearing down the sewer.

Scalia is being dishonest because equal rights cannot be denied simply because a majority of people don't like what someone says on a message board or does in their bedroom.

And yes, he has once again proven by his own words why he is no longer qualified to sit on that bench.

Well, SCROTUS made their decision and they forgot to flush.
Hashem will Flushem.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

i guess you leftie idiots LIKE fascism....

 

[rightwinger]

Scalia's attack on the Supreme Court sounds like something right off of FoxNews

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Switched over to Fox News this morning...

Well Fox News IS the most trusted News Resource in the US. So as many have pointed out, that includes Leftists... who, when they want the straight scoop, turn to Fox News.

Personally, I go to The Blaze or Drudge, but to each their own... .

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Antonin Scalia Dissent In Marriage Equality Case Is Even More Unhinged Than You'd Think

Switched over to Fox News this morning, you know, for shits and giggles and they could't stop talking about Scalia's Dissent. However, every time they quoted it, there was no mention of law or precedent or any type of logical argument in the form of a traditional dissenting opinion, just personal attacks and mindless rambling.

Very shameful to see a long-time justice on this nations highest court act this way.

"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."

At least he admitted that the case was very personal to him, alluding to his traditional Catholic beliefs. Unfortunately, the SCOTUS functions as a secular body, reason and logic trump Jewish fairy tales and a collection of letters written by the followers of Christ. (the bible)


Does he ever make an argument against the majority opinion or does he just attack his colleagues like child?

I believe the Scalia and Thomas are well beyond their prime. Scalia may be in early stages of dementia.

It's interesting to note how the much older Ginsberg is still more articulate than ever.

Scalia has all his shit in one pile.

Scalia: 'This Court' is a ‘Threat to American Democracy’
By Terence P. Jeffrey | June 26, 2015 | 10:52 AM EDT
9K
Shares
FacebookTwitterMore

Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Anthony Kennedy, and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
(CNSNews.com) - In his dissent from the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which declared that same-sex marriage was a right, Justice Antonin Scalia declared that this Supreme Court has become a “threat to American democracy.

“I write separately to call attention to this Court’s threat to American democracy,” Scalia said.

“This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.”

Here is an excerpt of a key passage from Scalia’s decion:

I write separately to call attention to this Court’s threat to American democracy.

The substance of today’s decree is not of immense personal importance to me. The law can recognize as marriage whatever sexual attachments and living arrangements it wishes, and can accord them favorable civil consequences, from tax treatment to rights of inheritance.

Those civil consequences—and the public approval that conferring the name of marriage evidences—can perhaps have adverse social effects, but no more adverse than the effects of many other controversial laws. So it is not of special importance to me what the law says about marriage. It is of overwhelming importance, however, who it is that rules me. Today’s 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. The opinion in these cases is the furthest extension in fact—and the furthest extension one can even imagine—of the Court’s claimed power to create “liberties” that the Constitution and its Amendments neglect to mention. This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.


Scalia This Court is a Threat to American Democracy

Yessir, Scalia is always spot on... and the last couple of days are no exception.

These two 'decisions' are a tribute to the DELUSION common to Relativism. And as Scalia points out, there is no greater threat to the Freedom of Americans, than the lowly Relativists.

They're now officially dangerous and a clear and present threat to the people of the United States.

And I don't see this ending well.

The US Federal Government, by today's decision, effectively licensed Degeneracy.

No Nation in Human history has ever survived a jump from that precipice.

 

[rightwinger]

Switched over to Fox News this morning...

Well Fox News IS the most trusted News Resource in the US. So as many have pointed out, that includes Leftists... who, when they want the straight scoop, turn to Fox News.

Personally, I go to The Blaze or Drudge, but to each their own... .

Applesauce

 

[hazlnut]

Seriously - if we lose any Justice, it should start with this senile old fuck.

 

[rightwinger]

I think Scalia needs to stand on principle and resign from the court in protest

That will teach them

 

[martybegan]

Typical progs, you just can't say someone is wrong (and he isn't), you have to attack them, their belief structure, and anything else about them to make yourselves feel all warm and fuzzy.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Antonin Scalia Dissent In Marriage Equality Case Is Even More Unhinged Than You'd Think

Switched over to Fox News this morning, you know, for shits and giggles and they could't stop talking about Scalia's Dissent. However, every time they quoted it, there was no mention of law or precedent or any type of logical argument in the form of a traditional dissenting opinion, just personal attacks and mindless rambling.

Very shameful to see a long-time justice on this nations highest court act this way.

"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."

At least he admitted that the case was very personal to him, alluding to his traditional Catholic beliefs. Unfortunately, the SCOTUS functions as a secular body, reason and logic trump Jewish fairy tales and a collection of letters written by the followers of Christ. (the bible)


Does he ever make an argument against the majority opinion or does he just attack his colleagues like child?

I believe the Scalia and Thomas are well beyond their prime. Scalia may be in early stages of dementia.

It's interesting to note how the much older Ginsberg is still more articulate than ever.

Scalia has all his shit in one pile.

Scalia: 'This Court' is a ‘Threat to American Democracy’
By Terence P. Jeffrey | June 26, 2015 | 10:52 AM EDT
9K
Shares
FacebookTwitterMore

Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Anthony Kennedy, and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
(CNSNews.com) - In his dissent from the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which declared that same-sex marriage was a right, Justice Antonin Scalia declared that this Supreme Court has become a “threat to American democracy.

“I write separately to call attention to this Court’s threat to American democracy,” Scalia said.

“This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.”

Here is an excerpt of a key passage from Scalia’s decion:

I write separately to call attention to this Court’s threat to American democracy.

The substance of today’s decree is not of immense personal importance to me. The law can recognize as marriage whatever sexual attachments and living arrangements it wishes, and can accord them favorable civil consequences, from tax treatment to rights of inheritance.

Those civil consequences—and the public approval that conferring the name of marriage evidences—can perhaps have adverse social effects, but no more adverse than the effects of many other controversial laws. So it is not of special importance to me what the law says about marriage. It is of overwhelming importance, however, who it is that rules me. Today’s 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. The opinion in these cases is the furthest extension in fact—and the furthest extension one can even imagine—of the Court’s claimed power to create “liberties” that the Constitution and its Amendments neglect to mention. This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.


Scalia This Court is a Threat to American Democracy

Yessir, Scalia is always spot on... and the last couple of days are no exception.

These two 'decisions' are a tribute to the DELUSION common to Relativism. And as Scalia points out, there is no greater threat to the Freedom of Americans, than the lowly Relativists.

They're now officially dangerous and a clear and present threat to the people of the United States.

And I don't see this ending well.

The US Federal Government, by today's decision, effectively licensed Degeneracy.

No Nation in Human history has ever survived a jump from that precipice.

I guess the more extreme Islamic countries have the right idea.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Typical progs, you just can't say someone is wrong (and he isn't), you have to attack them, their belief structure, and anything else about them to make yourselves feel all warm and fuzzy.

lol, irony alert.

 

[konradv]

Scalia seems to be the #1 reason term limits for judges is gaining traction.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Antonin Scalia Dissent In Marriage Equality Case Is Even More Unhinged Than You'd Think

Switched over to Fox News this morning, you know, for shits and giggles and they could't stop talking about Scalia's Dissent. However, every time they quoted it, there was no mention of law or precedent or any type of logical argument in the form of a traditional dissenting opinion, just personal attacks and mindless rambling.

Very shameful to see a long-time justice on this nations highest court act this way.

"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."

At least he admitted that the case was very personal to him, alluding to his traditional Catholic beliefs. Unfortunately, the SCOTUS functions as a secular body, reason and logic trump Jewish fairy tales and a collection of letters written by the followers of Christ. (the bible)


Does he ever make an argument against the majority opinion or does he just attack his colleagues like child?

I believe the Scalia and Thomas are well beyond their prime. Scalia may be in early stages of dementia.

It's interesting to note how the much older Ginsberg is still more articulate than ever.

You have to understand the rightwingers on the Court and those who agree with them support the narrowest interpretation of the Constitution, with the least amount of latitude, not because of any high minded ideals,

but simply because they know such an interpretation best impedes progress.

They want people to believe that every change must be done by amendment,

because they know that amendments are difficult, and have become close to impossible in today's political climate.
Only when they lose a big battle do they start spouting off about amendments.

 

[martybegan]

Typical progs, you just can't say someone is wrong (and he isn't), you have to attack them, their belief structure, and anything else about them to make yourselves feel all warm and fuzzy.

lol, irony alert.

Nope.

 

[martybegan]

Antonin Scalia Dissent In Marriage Equality Case Is Even More Unhinged Than You'd Think

Switched over to Fox News this morning, you know, for shits and giggles and they could't stop talking about Scalia's Dissent. However, every time they quoted it, there was no mention of law or precedent or any type of logical argument in the form of a traditional dissenting opinion, just personal attacks and mindless rambling.

Very shameful to see a long-time justice on this nations highest court act this way.

"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."

At least he admitted that the case was very personal to him, alluding to his traditional Catholic beliefs. Unfortunately, the SCOTUS functions as a secular body, reason and logic trump Jewish fairy tales and a collection of letters written by the followers of Christ. (the bible)


Does he ever make an argument against the majority opinion or does he just attack his colleagues like child?

I believe the Scalia and Thomas are well beyond their prime. Scalia may be in early stages of dementia.

It's interesting to note how the much older Ginsberg is still more articulate than ever.

You have to understand the rightwingers on the Court and those who agree with them support the narrowest interpretation of the Constitution, with the least amount of latitude, not because of any high minded ideals,

but simply because they know such an interpretation best impedes progress.

They want people to believe that every change must be done by amendment,

because they know that amendments are difficult, and have become close to impossible in today's political climate.
Only when they lose a big battle do they start spouting off about amendments.

Words mean things. Documents mean things. to Progs such as youself the ends always justify the means.

SSM would have been legal legislatively in more than 1/2 the country 10-15 years from now if you would have just continued what you were doing. The court SHOULD have voted to make states recognize other SSM's issued in other States, not force all states to issue. THAT would have been following the outline of the Constitution, not the ruling we got last week.

But by using progressive lawyers to get what you want, you have found the cheap and easy way, and all it requires is destroying the concept of the constitution as written.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Antonin Scalia Dissent In Marriage Equality Case Is Even More Unhinged Than You'd Think

Switched over to Fox News this morning, you know, for shits and giggles and they could't stop talking about Scalia's Dissent. However, every time they quoted it, there was no mention of law or precedent or any type of logical argument in the form of a traditional dissenting opinion, just personal attacks and mindless rambling.

Very shameful to see a long-time justice on this nations highest court act this way.

"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."

At least he admitted that the case was very personal to him, alluding to his traditional Catholic beliefs. Unfortunately, the SCOTUS functions as a secular body, reason and logic trump Jewish fairy tales and a collection of letters written by the followers of Christ. (the bible)


Does he ever make an argument against the majority opinion or does he just attack his colleagues like child?

I believe the Scalia and Thomas are well beyond their prime. Scalia may be in early stages of dementia.

It's interesting to note how the much older Ginsberg is still more articulate than ever.

You have to understand the rightwingers on the Court and those who agree with them support the narrowest interpretation of the Constitution, with the least amount of latitude, not because of any high minded ideals,

but simply because they know such an interpretation best impedes progress.

They want people to believe that every change must be done by amendment,

because they know that amendments are difficult, and have become close to impossible in today's political climate.
Only when they lose a big battle do they start spouting off about amendments.

Words mean things. Documents mean things. to Progs such as youself the ends always justify the means.

SSM would have been legal legislatively in more than 1/2 the country 10-15 years from now if you would have just continued what you were doing. The court SHOULD have voted to make states recognize other SSM's issued in other States, not force all states to issue. THAT would have been following the outline of the Constitution, not the ruling we got last week.

But by using progressive lawyers to get what you want, you have found the cheap and easy way, and all it requires is destroying the concept of the constitution as written.

Gay marriage was an easily settled question because as you say, words mean something and the words in the Constitution that guarantee equal protection under the law easily settle the question.