Antonin Scalia: Women Don’t Have Constitutional Protection Against Discrimination

[doxydad]

This man, whose court has voted against the rights of people and in favor of corporations a staggering 88% of the time – that would be 9 out of 10 — since 2011, has clearly abandoned any precept of having judicial jurisprudence and replaced it with his own personal bigoted viewpoints. This isn’t even up for debate no matter how much I disagree with the man personally. His opinions are replacing the rule of law in this nation.

I guess it’s okay because Supreme Court Justices are not held to a judicial standard of ethics like every other judge in the nation. They are exempt. I now wonder why that is because clearly they are not all held to ethical standards in being appointed to this position. If you think that this is bad then I must warn you there are even more extreme judges out there.

http://aattp.org/antonin-scalia-women-dont-have-constitutional-protection-against-discrimination/

[Shrike47]

1. He's right, it's not there in the Constitution. You might have thought it wasn't needed anymore.

WRONG! If it's not there, he can and will ignore women's rights.

[Ilsa]

2. We need the ERA. Period. nt

[samsingh]

3. the idiot who seems to hate women. Bad relationship with his mother?

Freudian fantasies?

[Warpy]

4. We're just cattle to that disgusting waste of skin and oxygen

and all civil rights belong to males, alone, preferably adult white males with money who share his belief that women are not human.