"Is any jury going to convict Jack Bauer? I don't think so. So the question is really whether we believe in these absolutes. And ought we believe in these absolutes. ... I don't care about holding people. I really don't." Justice Scalia on 24 and torture. 24 and torture previously.
posted on Jun 19, 2007 - View this thread

Justice Scalia has trouble minding his manners. Reminds me of this.
posted on Mar 30, 2006 - View this thread

Justice Scalia spoke in support of Guantanamo Bay earlier this month, despite the fact that Gitmo cases such as Hamdan v. Rumsfeld are pending before the Supreme Court. "War is war, and it has never been the case that when you captured a combatant you have to give them a jury trial in your civil courts," Scalia said, prompting calls that he recuse himself from the case, which will be heard today. Justice Roberts has already done so, as he has previously ruled on Hamdan.
posted on Mar 28, 2006 - View this thread

The Fourth Amendment provides, in part, that "...no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause." The Supreme Court has issued its (yet another) 8-0 opinion, authored by Justice Scalia in the case of United States v. Grubbs, overturning the Ninth Circuit decision. Justice Souter filed a concurring opinion. Grubbs deals with the question of anticipatory warrants, and it is the first time that the Court has addressed the practice. It appears that under this ruling, preemptive warrants can issue without existing probable cause, but merely on the supposition that probable cause will exist in the future.

Some legal scholars had anticipated that at least the more conservative members of the Court would rule against anticipatory warrants. After all, under Blackstone's analysis of the common law rule that contributed to the Fourth Amendment, as noted by Professor Orin Kerr in the NYU Journal of Law and Liberty symposium on the subject, warrants "issue" when they are signed by the judge, and not when the precedent condition occurs. Professor Chris Slobogin disagrees. Kerr has posted a preliminary analysis of the decision on his new blawg. The case has previously been discussed by the smart people over at the Volokh Conspiracy.
posted on Mar 22, 2006 - View this thread

Justice Scalia faces probing question at NYU due to previous dissenting opinion in Texas sodomy case. Questioner responds to the controversy. via
posted on Apr 15, 2005 - View this thread

Why does Scalia hate America? Justice "Fat Tony" Scalia orders reporters to erase tapes of one of his speeches. Aren't public servents supposed to be public?
posted on Apr 8, 2004 - View this thread

"You've admitted what you are Fat Tony, now you're just haggling over the price." Thanks for the Churchill whore meme to RogerAiles, who flagged this comment by Justice Scalia: "If it is reasonable to think that a Supreme Court justice can be bought so cheap, the nation is in deeper trouble than I had imagined." So, what is the going rate?
posted on Mar 20, 2004 - View this thread

Scalia Was Cheney Hunt Trip Guest; Ethics Concern Grows Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia traveled as an official guest of Vice President Dick Cheney on a small government jet that served as Air Force Two when the pair came here last month to hunt ducks. The revelation cast further doubts about whether Scalia can be an impartial judge in Cheney's upcoming case before the Supreme Court, legal ethics experts said. The hunting trip took place just weeks after the high court agreed to take up Cheney's bid to keep secret the details of his energy policy task force.
posted on Feb 6, 2004 - View this thread

Justice Scalia's recusal in the Pledge case has prompted a serious debate on the judicial role. Robert Alt has suggested that the Justice's recusal carries an important warning for the Senate in confirming new judges; if the Senate requires the nominees to answer questions about their opinions on potential cases, those nominees would have to recuse themselves if those cases later indeed came before them. Matthew Franck, on the other hand, suggests "this argument ... permits the requirements of judicial ethics — and even a terribly broad reading of them — to trump the constitutional obligation of senators to inform themselves adequately about the kinds of judges they are being asked to confirm." [more inside]
posted on Oct 22, 2003 - View this thread

The Onion keeps getting funnier In this week's edition, Antonin Scalia bans the media from covering his acceptance of a free-speech award, and also tells Americans "Most of the rights that you enjoy go way beyond what the Constitution requires." Haw-haw! Get it? Oh, wait a second...
posted on Mar 19, 2003 - View this thread

Scalia gives divinity school students a peek at what his activism is really about. I can't say it any better than he does so I'll quote: "The reaction of people of faith to this tendency of democracy to obscure the divine authority behind government should not be resignation to it, but the resolution to combat it as effectively as possible." Of course we knew Scalia detested democracy on 12/12/2000 with his decision that infamous day but now he admits favoritism to theocracy.
posted on Jul 10, 2002 - View this thread

God's Justice and Ours. Justice Antonin Scalia writes on capital punishment in First Things: "In my view, the major impetus behind modern aversion to the death penalty is the equation of private morality with governmental morality. This is a predictable (though I believe erroneous and regrettable) reaction to modern, democratic self–government."
posted on Jun 12, 2002 - View this thread

Scalia: Think the dealth penalty wrong? Resign In particular, he says, any Catholic jurist who agrees with the Vatican's anti-death penalty stance should resign. One to raise an eyebrow over, given that Scalia - a jurist who just happens to be Catholic - has been a consistent foe of Roe v. Wade and legalized abortion. He says his opposition to Roe, however, is mainly legal, and adds that his religious views should play no role in his decisions.
posted on Feb 7, 2002 - View this thread

He does return favors, but how does it affect the workers? Eugene Scalia is President Bush's nominee for Labor Department solicitor. Scalia is one of nine children of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who was a driving force behind the court ruling that stopped the counting of disputed presidential votes in Florida last year.
posted on Dec 17, 2001 - View this thread

Scalia's Constitution is dead. So, do rulings from the Warren Court deserve deference? Are colonial practices our standard for cruel and unusual punishment? Does the right to bear arms stop at muskets, or does it include nuclear arms?
posted on Nov 15, 2001 - View this thread

Is the Consitution a "living" document? Following "Scary" Scalia's arguments, the Dread Scott decision was a wise and appropriate one, right?
posted on Mar 14, 2001 - View this thread

For Comment: "Does personality override politics in the Rehnquist Supreme Court?"
File under: "What is the rhetorical and effective nature of constitutional interpretation and judicial review?" I have always been intrigued by the ways in which the justices of the Supreme Court selectively reveal tidbits about their personality and the nature of their interactions. "Scalia and Ginsburg are polar opposites, but are secretly best friends!" "O'Connor likes Georgia O'Keefe, and has several originals in her office!"

While much of this can be explained by the media creating a story where there is none, the above comments by Thomas lead me to wonder that, if 'opinion' is the form by which laws are reviewed, then perhaps 'individuality,' 'style,' or 'personality' have an impact on how the concept of justice and constitutionality are applied.
posted on Dec 14, 2000 - View this thread

"For those who are feeling this election doesn't much matter, who think it's a choice between Tweedledum and Tweedledee, the court is the reason to care," said Lois Williams, senior counsel for litigation at the Washington Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights, a liberal advocacy group.

"If we get another Scalia or Thomas, we are courting disaster," said Ralph Neas, president of People for the American Way. "We are just one election away, and one or two new justices away, from the civil and constitutional rights we take for granted being eroded or eliminated overnight."
posted on Jun 11, 2000 - View this thread

Damn Supreme Court. Just when you thought this was a free country, now they're telling strippers to keep their G-strings on.
posted on Mar 29, 2000 - View this thread