Scalia Turns Advocate Against Obama as Queries Criticized
Source: Bloomberg
Scalias tone this year, particularly in cases involving the Obama administration, is raising new criticism over the temperament of a justice who has always relished the give-and- take of the Supreme Courts public sessions. Some lawyers say Scalia, a 1986 appointee of Republican President Ronald Reagan, is crossing the line that separates tough scrutiny from advocacy.
His questions have been increasingly confrontational, said Charles Fried, a Harvard Law School professor who served as Reagans top Supreme Court advocate. While the justice has always asked pointed questions, in the health-care case he came across much more like an advocate.
Scalias approach is fueling the perception that the biggest cases this term, including health care, may be influenced by politics, rather than the legal principles that he and other justices say should be their guide. A Bloomberg News poll in March showed that 75 percent of Americans think the courts decision on the 2010 law will be based more on politics than on constitutional merit.
................
Its disturbing to see a justice use oral argument as a platform for expressing the talking points that you hear each night on Fox News, Kendall said. I cant think of a serious question that he posed in either argument suggesting that he was open to have his mind changed.
Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-15/scalia-turns-advocate-against-obama-as-queries-criticized.html
wilt the stilt
(4,528 posts)juror's in history. Blatantly political and activist. He should have never been appointed.
Baitball Blogger
(46,775 posts)Scalia, Thomas and Roberts. In that order.
Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)Alito.
alterfurz
(2,475 posts)Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)47of74
(18,470 posts)I feel the need to do this;
SoCalMusicLover
(3,194 posts)When the decision against the health care law comes back 5-4 against, completely along political lines, it will be BREAKING NEWS.
The only breaking news for me will be if they uphold the law. They never had any intention of doing that. They didn't even need to waste their time hearing arguments. This case was decided the second they took it.
People will be so shocked and surprised, but I'm not sure why.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)....
aggiesal
(8,943 posts)I believe their logic is going to be so twisted to meet their pre-determined outcome,
that they will lose all respect and credibility.
0rganism
(23,984 posts)I'll bet you most of the people in this country can't even name the current justices, let alone make any coherent statements about their relative integrity. We The People just don't give 2 shits anymore as long as we get ours, and we're reaping the rewards of our indolence every day.
aggiesal
(8,943 posts)the stupidity of the American electorate.
In all honesty, I don't believe any time in history,
the majority of the electorate could name the members
of the Supreme Court.
But, they know all the important stuff like,
they can name all the winners of American Idol !!!
Response to 0rganism (Reply #27)
aggiesal This message was self-deleted by its author.
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)Their political over Judicial loyalties become.
They even at times appear to take pride in it.
The only hope we have is if the Insurance lobby that wants the mandate (only without regulation) has enough clout as a corporate voice to demand they allow the mandate.
It is down to if they are more loyal to Republicans running for office or the Corporations they both serve, that is the real battle of their involvement in this decision even if few see it, or see it but prefer to ignore it.
AndyTiedye
(23,500 posts)All the pre-existing condition exclusions will be re-instated, premiums will go up even faster than before, since the insurance companies will have NO fear of regulation after this, since the Supreme Court has their back!
stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)...describe does not come to pass. I will not accept 20 more years without SIGNIFICANT health care reform in this country.
I think I will be joined by many, many others too in a movement that simply will become impossible to ignore. A movement that will spring up faster than most would believe possible I believe.
It's for THAT reason that I think the Supreme Court will uphold the ACA.
I know it doesn't seem like it with all of the political theater we're surrounded by currently, but if I had to bet on the outcome today, I'd bet they allow the ACA to remain law.
AndyTiedye
(23,500 posts)
than we could possibly afford to contribute to our side.
If they want spend more, they can just raise our premiums to cover it. With ACA overturned, they can spend that money however they want. (ACA requires that 85% be spent on actual health care).
underpants
(182,988 posts)Scalia had to have voted for it or his entire career becomes a complete joke
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101620917
Baitball Blogger
(46,775 posts)It's so damn obvious and he never gets censured.
asjr
(10,479 posts)concerned with impeachment of himself.
qb
(5,924 posts)any or all of the above.
I say this half-heartedly because I know it will never happen.
Pakid
(478 posts)Or can we It could not hurt to put up an on line petition against him!
The Wizard
(12,552 posts)for not recusing themselves in Bush v Gore. There were clear conflicts of interest. Scalia's son worked for the law firm representing Bush and Thomas' wife was on the Bush transition team.
Scalia also ruled on a case involving his personal friend, Dick Cheney.
For eight long years the United States was ruled by an international crime cartel because Scalia issued a stay effectively ending the Florida recount. He then voted to install the figurehead of the Bush crime family.
The next three generations will be forced to pay for the electoral theft engineered by Antonin (Nino the Fixer in the Nixon White House) Scalia. He's the driving force behind the most corrupt group of jurists ever assembled. They make Caligula look transparent and they have compromised jurist prudence for years to come. Citizens United and Bush v Gore are two decisions that will live in infamy.
secondvariety
(1,245 posts)Nobody is that pro-corporate without a greasing of the palm.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)vie for speaking engagements on the wealthy right-wing vaudeville circus. For them, it is about flattering and entertaining their really, really rich friends.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)and for not recusing himself from cases involving Cheney. He's as corrupt as any SCOTUS justice has ever been.
Auntie Bush
(17,528 posts)he and that wife are going around actively campaigning against it?
rgbecker
(4,834 posts)Of course he takes his work seriously....comtemplating the hard questions in life.
<sarcasm>
L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)after Obama's second term.
I like the saying "People don't change, the old ones die."
But I worry that old politicians and judges do change, as do other elderly people, slowly moving towards dementia.
WCGreen
(45,558 posts)Judges.
Ten years on the bench and then either to a high court or back to private practice...
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)silent clarence had his trophy wife hand him the money
these guys were bought and paid for as soon as obama won the presidency.
roberts isn`t going to like it but his court will go down in history as one of the most corrupt in our history
i`m not sure that`s what he had in mind when he got the job.
rusty fender
(3,428 posts)you mean a buffalo, a rhino, an elephant?
Canuckistanian
(42,290 posts)Zoeisright
(8,339 posts)And take that pig Thomas with him.
goclark
(30,404 posts)for our country.
glinda
(14,807 posts)progressoid
(50,011 posts)His departure can't come soon enough.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)DFW
(54,476 posts)Unfortunately this is not news. Scalia is about as fair and balanced as Fox "News," and
his votes are as predictable as the sunrise.
Reagan's legacy is one the keeps on putrifying.
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)which he failed to recuse himself?