Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Twilight of Antonin Scalia
The Twilight of Antonin ScaliaThe conservative hero's fiery 2012 dissent on same-sex marriage could be his most influential opinionbut not in the way he intended.
................
Scalia may have outdone himself in his 2013 dissent in the case of United States v. Windsor. For years, he has been unrelenting in opposing constitutional protections for gays and lesbians. In his 2003 dissent in Lawrence v. Texas, Scalia warned darkly that the Court majority has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda even though many Americans do not want persons who openly engage in homosexual conduct as partners in their business, as scoutmasters for their children, as teachers in their childrens schools, or as boarders in their homes.
In Windsor, the Courts majority struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, which forbade federal recognition of same-sex marriages that were legal under state law. In an opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy, the majority concluded that its purpose and effect were to disparage and to injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity.
The opinion was the triumph of the homosexual agenda Scalia had denounced. The majority opinion, Scalia wrote in a slashing dissent, meant the end of state laws restricting marriage to opposite-sex couples:
The real rationale of todays opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by bare ... desire to harm couples in same-sex marriages. How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status.
the rest:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/08/the-twilight-of-antonin-scalia/378884/
In retrospect, Scalias choice of words may have been a mistake.
*********
Scalia Cited In Yet Another Ruling For Gay Marriage
about an hour ago Yet another federal judge has cited Justice Antonin Scalia in a decision striking down a gay marriage ban
-- Read More →
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/scalia-cited-gay-marriage-ruling
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 1226 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (4)
ReplyReply to this post
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Twilight of Antonin Scalia (Original Post)
kpete
Aug 2014
OP
Arent the 4, maybe 5 rightwing pricks going to hear VA case and maybe go after
BaggersRDumb
Aug 2014
#1
BaggersRDumb
(186 posts)1. Arent the 4, maybe 5 rightwing pricks going to hear VA case and maybe go after
the rights of Americans yet again?
Scalia is a vile person...by the way
RKP5637
(67,030 posts)2. Scalia should be no where near SCOTUS let alone serve on SCOTUS. He is a bigoted vile person and
tips the scales of justice in a very dark and negative manner.
flamin lib
(14,559 posts)3. I think Scalia may be suffering dementia. I can't cite the case but
he actually argued againt a majority opinion he authored. I'll see if I can find it.
Edit
The case was Whitman v American Trucking Assn. He wrote the dissenting opinion and in EPA v Holmer cited the Whitman case in his disent completely reversing the positions of the parties even though he wrote the Whitman decision.
NV Whino
(20,886 posts)4. I would suggest that any public official that serves for life
Should have to pass certain mental and physical, which can affect mental, health evaluations at certain intervals or ages.
former9thward
(31,801 posts)5. Unfortunately that would take a Constitutional amendment.
There are no such limitations in the Constitution for federal judges.