Law Scalia Died today

[second sight]

as soon as I started reading these threads I got pissed off by the vile shit some of you wrote, after spending a couple days reading and reflecting on what his life has meant to this nation, I'm even more enraged. he was one of the most influential people of our time as well as our nations.
the respect from his peers from all political aspects is unprecedented, he was a defender of the constitution the likes of we may never see again.

all of you that wrote the vile shit, you are the problem with this nation, greatness stood amongst us and you were to stupid to take notice....even after the fact you would rather spit on his grave then reflect. to this I can only hope you reap what you sow

 

[Fawlty]

as soon as I started reading these threads I got pissed off by the vile shit some of you wrote, after spending a couple days reading and reflecting on what his life has meant to this nation, I'm even more enraged. he was one of the most influential people of our time as well as our nations.
the respect from his peers from all political aspects is unprecedented, he was a defender of the constitution the likes of we may never see again.

all of you that wrote the vile shit, you are the problem with this nation, greatness stood amongst us and you were to stupid to take notice....even after the fact you would rather spit on his grave then reflect. to this I can only hope you reap what you sow

Remember this when a judge you didn't like dies.

 

[Arkain2K]

Also is it true this Scalia compared homosexuality to bestiality? How is that even possible? What an absolute shit show.

But then again this is a system/country were in 2003 a judge could compare homosexuality to bestiality.

You know who think Scalia said dudes banging dudes is the same as dudes banging animals?

Lazy-asses and willful-ignorance who don't want to read the court opinions themselves and instead chose to perpetuate perversed versions of it that they learned through misquotes on social media and outright lies from the lamestream media, that's who.

This is probably the same group of retards who are perpetuating the lie that "Scalia believe Blacks should not go to top colleges", just because Mother Jones said so.

In the 2003 decision, Scalia harshly criticized the court’s decision that struck down a Texas anti-sodomy law that had been used to convict a gay man of having sex with another man in his own apartment. The opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy overturned a 1986 ruling in Bowers v. Hardwick that had upheld state sodomy laws.

This is what Scalia wrote in his fiery dissent:

“The Texas statute undeniably seeks to further the belief of its citizens that certain forms of sexual behavior are ‘immoral and unacceptable,’ . . . the same interest furthered by criminal laws against fornication, bigamy, adultery, adult incest, bestiality, and obscenity.

Bowers held that this was a legitimate state interest.

The Court today reaches the opposite conclusion.

The Texas statute, it says, ‘furthers no legitimate state interest which can justify its intrusion into the personal and private life of the individual,’ …

The Court embraces instead Justice [John Paul] Stevens’ declaration in his Bowers dissent, that 'the fact that the governing majority in a State has traditionally viewed a particular practice as immoral is not a sufficient reason for upholding a law prohibiting the practice.

This effectively decrees the end of all morals legislation.

There you have it: Scalia pointed out that the Court was flip-flopping HARD on the issue of Morality: on one hand, they said the State Governments CANNOT use Morality to make laws that ban things people do in private, namely Sodomy, all at the same time the Court was adamant to uphold the State Government's use of Morality to ban people from doing OTHER things in private that society still frowns upon, such as Incest, Polygamy, or Beastiality.

Is he wrong? Ofcourse not! As to this very day, ALL of those things are still banned nation-wide, based on the notion of Morality as determined by the people of each individual State. They're illegal, because the majority of the people think "it's gross!!!", that's something that the Court themselves just said CANNOT be used as the basis to ban other people's private and personal activities.

In Scalia's view as a judge, the States either can use Morality to make laws, or they cannot. What Scalia the Literalist Justice absolutely HATES is that the inconsistent Liberal wing of the Court gets creative all the time and picks and choose the laws at will, even if it means going against their own established precedents. They're essentially saying Morality-based Laws are illegal, but then it's also legal, except when it's not. And they offered absolutely no legal basis whatsoever as to why or why not, besides "because we said so".

And then in the hand of libtard "journalists", that excellent and legally-sound Dissent by Scalia against the Court's flip-flopping basically morphed into something that means "Homophobic Scalia think gay guys are the same as dudes banging goats!!!", or some idiotic liberal interpretations to that effect.

Well, they sure fooled a lot of lazy bums, didn't they?

Don't feel bad though, you're neither the first nor the last guy who got poisoned by Leftist propaganda against a Justice of the United States Supreme Court who was well-respected by both sides of the bench.

I'm not sure if the celebrating assholes in this thread actually enjoy reading the court opnions in full context, instead of reading the twisted version from the lamestream media. Had they actually did that, they would undoubtedly have the same appreciation for Antonin Scalia, as ALL the other Supreme Court justices - Conservatives and Moderates, Men and Women, Whites and Colored, Active and Retired alike - have expressed upon the news of his passing.

 

[second sight]

Remember this when a judge you didn't like dies.

I can't even fathom the hate displayed here for a man that devoted his life for the greater good.
He didn't rule on party lines, he ruled on his best interpretation of the founders intent. We simply don't have people like that anymore. Go read what the stance liberals of today have to say about him.

Your alinsky rules don't apply here or to me.

 

[Arkain2K]

Supreme Court justices weigh in on Antonin Scalia's death

Below are statements from current and retired Supreme Court justices on the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. Scalia died of a heart attack on Saturday at age 79 at Cibolo Creek Ranch in Texas. Appointed by President Ronald Reagan, he served on the high court for three decades.​

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.:

"On behalf of the Court and retired Justices, I am saddened to report that our colleague Justice Antonin Scalia has passed away. He was an extraordinary individual and jurist, admired and treasured by his colleagues. His passing is a great loss to the Court and the country he so loyally served. We extend our deepest condolences to his wife Maureen and his family."

Justice Anthony Kennedy:

"In years to come any history of the Supreme Court will, and must, recount the wisdom, scholarship, and technical brilliance that Justice Scalia brought to the Court. His insistence on demanding standards shaped the work of the Court in its private discussions, its oral arguments, and its written opinions.

"Yet these historic achievements are all the more impressive and compelling because the foundations of Justice Scalia’s jurisprudence, the driving force in all his work, and his powerful personality were shaped by an unyielding commitment to the Constitution of the United States and to the highest ethical and moral standards.

"In the fullness of time Justice Scalia’s beautiful family will be sustained by the force and dynamism of his intellect and personality, attributes that were so decent and so powerful; but now they mourn. We give them assurances of our deepest sympathy and our lasting friendship."

Justice Clarence Thomas:

"Justice Scalia was a good man; a wonderful husband who loved his wife and his family; a man of strong faith; a towering intellect; a legal giant; and a dear, dear friend. In every case, he gave it his all to get the broad principles and the small details right. Virginia and I are deeply saddened by his sudden and untimely death. Our prayers and love go out to Maureen and the Scalia family. It is hard to imagine the Court without my friend. I will miss him beyond all measure."

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg:

"Toward the end of the opera Scalia/Ginsburg, tenor Scalia and soprano Ginsburg sing a duet: 'We are different, we are one,' different in our interpretation of written texts, one in our reverence for the Constitution and the institution we serve. From our years together at the D.C. Circuit, we were best buddies. We disagreed now and then, but when I wrote for the Court and received a Scalia dissent, the opinion ultimately released was notably better than my initial circulation. Justice Scalia nailed all the weak spots—the 'applesauce' and 'argle bargle'—and gave me just what I needed to strengthen the majority opinion. He was a jurist of captivating brilliance and wit, with a rare talent to make even the most sober judge laugh. The press referred to his 'energetic fervor,' 'astringent intellect,' 'peppery prose,' 'acumen,' and 'affability,' all apt descriptions. He was eminently quotable, his pungent opinions so clearly stated that his words never slipped from the reader’s grasp.

"Justice Scalia once described as the peak of his days on the bench an evening at the Opera Ball when he joined two Washington National Opera tenors at the piano for a medley of songs. He called it the famous Three Tenors performance. He was, indeed, a magnificent performer. It was my great good fortune to have known him as working colleague and treasured friend."

Justice Stephen G. Breyer:

"Nino Scalia was a legal titan. He used his great energy, fine mind, and stylistic genius to further the rule of law as he saw it. He was man of integrity and wit. His interests were wide ranging as was his knowledge about law, this Nation and its Constitution. He loved his family. He also loved ideas, music, and the out of doors. He shared with us, his colleagues, his enthusiasms, his humor, his mental agility, his seriousness of purpose. We benefitted greatly. His contribution to the law was a major one. Our hearts go out to Maureen and his family. We have lost a fine colleague and a very good friend. We shall miss him hugely."

Justice Samuel Alito:

"Martha-Ann and I are deeply saddened by the terrible news. Nino was a remarkable person, and I feel very honored to have known him and to have had him as a colleague. He was a towering figure who will be remembered as one of the most important figures in the history of the Supreme Court and a scholar who deeply influenced our legal culture. His intellect, learning, wit, and memorable writing will be sorely missed, and Martha-Ann and I will deeply miss him as a friend. We will keep Nino, Maureen, and their family in our prayers."

Justice Sonia Sotomayor:

"My colleague Nino Scalia was devoted to his family, friends, our Court, and our country. He left an indelible mark on our history. I will miss him and the dimming of his special light is a great loss for me. My thoughts are with Maureen, his children, and his grandchildren."

Justice Elena Kagan:

"Nino Scalia will go down in history as one of the most transformational Supreme Court Justices of our nation. His views on interpreting texts have changed the way all of us think and talk about the law. I admired Nino for his brilliance and erudition, his dedication and energy, and his peerless writing. And I treasured Nino’s friendship: I will always remember, and greatly miss, his warmth, charm, and generosity. Maureen and the whole Scalia family are in my thoughts and prayers."

Justice Sandra Day O’Connor (Retired):

"I am deeply saddened to learn of the passing of my dear friend and colleague, Justice Antonin Scalia. Nino was a tireless public servant who left an indelible mark on the Court and on our jurisprudence. His gifts of wisdom, wit, and wordsmithing were unparalleled, and he will be sorely missed."

Justice John Paul Stevens (Retired):

"Nino Scalia was a good friend, a brilliant man with an incomparable sense of humor, and as articulate as any Justice who ever served on the Court. He has had a major impact on the development of the law, and earned the respect of all his colleagues. We will all miss him."


http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...-supreme-court-death-justice-scalia/80375976/

 

[Supereem]

Don't feel bad though, you're neither the first nor the last guy who got poisoned by Leftist propaganda against a Justice of the United States Supreme Court who was well-respected by both sides of the bench.

.

I stand corrected. I saw the comment on a facebook and I believe my first reference to it in this thread asked if it was legit (I think, I cant be bothered checking). And I wasnt going to go read American case history.

My point was the concept that judges can be conservative or progressive, which is ridiculous in my learned opinion. Even the thought of politicans saying they will elect a 'conservative' (i.e right wing/Republican friendly judge) is disgusting. Judges should not be pawns of the politicians. To be honest I have a feeling the best American legal minds are anywhere near the US Supreme Court.

I defended Australia recently as having a really good judiciary. I actually want to correct my statement. I was referring to the high/federal courts.

Some state courts are absolutely shocking. Lawyers being appointed magistrates despite no legal practice, instead 20 years as political advisers for the ruling party, crappy barristers being appointed judges of a particular ethnic background being appointed supreme court positions (our highest state court) due to particularly strong pressure from party donors in that ethnic background. It is a slap in the face to good advocates that someone who had never previously worked as an advocate is in a magistrate position.

It seems to be a growing problem.

 

[pinger]

My god your political system is broken.

 

[Arkain2K]

My god your political system is broken.

Fortunately, our Supreme Court is not.

Idiots in this thread can bitch, whine, and hyperbole all they want, ESPECIALLY those who are too damn lazy to actually read SCOTUS opinions and dissents, but I have read my share of court transcripts to proudly say that the primary objective of every single Justices on that SCOTUS bench during my lifetime have always been defending the Constitution and the Republic, and they're honestly serving our nation by interpreting the law to their best judicial abilities, without giving a damn about any career politicians, political parties, lobbyists, or corporate interests. That's all that matters.

Congressmen and Presidents on the other hand, are politicians by design and thus inherently flawed. There will never be any politicians on Capitol Hill or in the White House during your lifetime who have intentions as pure as the Justices serving in the Supreme Court.

 

[Aegon Spengler]

He was a scumbag. The world is better off. Like Karl Rove, George Bush, Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, this was a man who wanted to see a world dominated by money, who did not give a second thought to the value of human life or the spirit of democracy.

If he had an enema they would have buried him in a match box

 

[afrdzak]

I can't even fathom the hate displayed here for a man that devoted his life for the greater good.
He didn't rule on party lines, he ruled on his best interpretation of the founders intent. We simply don't have people like that anymore. Go read what the stance liberals of today have to say about him.

Your alinsky rules don't apply here or to me.

While I agree with your sentiment, this is laughable coming from you. The guy, who in this very thread, expressed a wish that it had been the President who had died instead.
GTFO with your hypocrisy.

too bad it wasn't potus

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

While I agree with your sentiment, this is laughable coming from you. The guy, who in this very thread, expressed a wish that it had been the President who had died instead.
GTFO with your hypocrisy.

Lmao....

Check and mate.

 

[BKMMAFAN]

There you have it: Scalia pointed out that the Court was flip-flopping HARD on the issue of Morality: on one hand, they said the State Governments CANNOT use Morality to make laws that ban things people do in private, namely Sodomy, all at the same time the Court was adamant to uphold the State Government's use of Morality to ban people from doing OTHER things in private that society still frowns upon, such as Incest, Polygamy, or Beastiality.

Is he wrong? Ofcourse not!!! As to this day, ALL of those things are still banned nation-wide, based solely on the notion of Morality. They're illegal, because the majority of the people think "it's gross!!!", that's something that the Court themselves just said CANNOT be used as the basis to ban other people's private and personal activities.

In Scalia's view as a judge, the States either can use Morality to make laws, or they cannot. What Scalia the Literalist Justice absolutely HATES is that the inconsistent Liberal wing of the Court gets creative all the time and picks and choose the laws at will, even if it means going against their own established precedents. They're essentually saying Morality-based Laws are illegal, but then it's also legal, except when it's not. And they offered absolutely no legal basis whatsoever as to why or why not, besides "because we said so".

Scalia's point that the majority's view of morality should limit how/when courts can overturn laws is a dangerous one. Just look at the law that was being challenged in Lawrence: a Texas statute prohibited sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex, but not identical behavior between different sex couples. That's quite a high level of discrimination against homosexuals. Scalia puts the onus squarely on the small minority of homosexuals (and their 'allies') to change the overwhelming majority's view (derived mostly from religious beliefs) that homosexual behavior is not only immoral, but criminal and should be punished by the state.

Scalia's opinions were often clouded by his inclusion in the moral majority. One his most interesting opinions was in Employment Div'n v. Smith where he wrote the majority opinion upholding the denial of state benefits to persons who were using peyote in Native American religious ceremonies. Most were shocked to see Scalia write the majority opinion in the case. Scalia wrote:

"[T]he State would be "prohibiting the free exercise [of religion]" in violation of the Free Exercise Clause if it sought to ban the performance of (or abstention from) physical acts solely because of their religious motivation, the Clause does not relieve an individual of the obligation to comply with a law that incidentally forbids (or requires) the performance of an act that his religious belief requires (or forbids) if the law is not specifically directed to religious practice and is otherwise constitutional as applied to those who engage in the specified act for nonreligious reason."

Imagine if a state law prohibited state benefits from going to persons who circumcised their children. Would Scalia have held that the impact on religious persons was merely 'incidental' as he did with a minority Native American religion? Very, very unlikely. The beauty of being in the majority, of course, is that it is always easier to argue that a law which impacts the majority's behavior is more likely to be non-incidental in terms of motivation.

 

[Fawlty]

I can't even fathom the hate displayed here for a man that devoted his life for the greater good.
He didn't rule on party lines, he ruled on his best interpretation of the founders intent. We simply don't have people like that anymore. Go read what the stance liberals of today have to say about him.

Your alinsky rules don't apply here or to me.

So, you're already making your excuse for being a jerk when the next liberal justice dies. Noted.

And I've written very critical things about Alinsky, but I couldn't expect you to know that.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

Some of his Liberal moments.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...ant_liberal_moments_on_the_supreme_court.html

 

[second sight]

While I agree with your sentiment, this is laughable coming from you. The guy, who in this very thread, expressed a wish that it had been the President who had died instead.
GTFO with your hypocrisy.

as I already noted in the thread that was directed at all the pos posters saying vile shit in what should have been a memorial thread about Scalia

history will remember him a one of most influential people in our nations history
you can't find a negative quote from anyone thats ever known him, worked with him or studied his work, yet look at the remarks from the posters here

 

[DevilsLettuce]

as I already noted in the thread that was directed at all the pos posters saying vile shit in what should have been a memorial thread about Scalia

history will remember him a one of most influential people in our history
you can't find a negative quote from anyone thats ever known him, worked with him or studied his work, yet look at the remarks from the posters here

History will remember you as one of the top 5 shittiest posters in Sherdog history, and that is all.

 

[Aegon Spengler]

History will see him in the same light as Rove, Kissinger, Cheney

 

[PolishHeadlock]

History will see him in the same light as Rove, Kissinger, Cheney

Scalia did a lot of great things for interpreting constitutional law but I don't think he had much to do with ending the Cold War on America's terms.

 

[NelmarksGhost]

Looks like a CIA whack.

 

[SODACKER]

Pretty crazy to think that a judge who's main objectives was to truly uphold constitutional text and uphold separation of branches is thought so lowly by some. Puts alot of credence to the other thread started that people would rather have a dictator they agree with than a system with separation of power.