General Discussion

garybeck

(9,942 posts) Tue Mar 26, 2013, 03:23 PM Mar 2013

Scalia !?!?!

Who woulda thunk Scalia would side with "liberals" on a 5-4 decision?

---------

Supreme Court restricts unwarranted police use of drug-sniffing dogs
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/26/supreme-court-restricts-unwarranted-police-use-of-drug-sniffing-dogs/

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that police cannot intrude onto private property and use drug-sniffing dogs to obtain probable cause for a more thorough search, in an untypical ruling that saw Justice Antonin Scalia side with the court’s liberal wing to swing the 5-4 decision.

14 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Scalia !?!?! (Original Post) garybeck Mar 2013 OP

he probably has friends who are drug runners tk2kewl Mar 2013 #1

Oxy-Rush?!? fleur-de-lisa Mar 2013 #11

That was my first thought too JanMichael Mar 2013 #12

Sometimes people are more complicated than they appear - I wouldn't have thought that of Scalia el_bryanto Mar 2013 #2

Even a broken clock modrepub Mar 2013 #3

Yep sakabatou Mar 2013 #7

It was Scalia AND Thomas with 3 liberals. DesMoinesDem Mar 2013 #4

Ok, if those two are on the right side of 5-4, which two normally reasonable judges are fucking up? JVS Mar 2013 #10

Alito, Roberts, Kennedy, Breyer dissenting DesMoinesDem Mar 2013 #13

He doesn't want them to find his stash under the doghouse in Rex Mar 2013 #5

Scalia votes against sniffing expeditions. HereSince1628 Mar 2013 #6

Is Alito a creationist? JVS Mar 2013 #8

Scotus is feeling the heat BlueStreak Mar 2013 #9

More to the point -- why did Breyer join the conservatives? kudzu22 Mar 2013 #14

tk2kewl

(18,133 posts)

1. he probably has friends who are drug runners

Reply to garybeck (Original post)

Tue Mar 26, 2013, 03:27 PM

Mar 2013

fleur-de-lisa

(14,624 posts)

11. Oxy-Rush?!?

Reply to tk2kewl (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 26, 2013, 04:01 PM

Mar 2013

JanMichael

(24,885 posts)

12. That was my first thought too

Reply to tk2kewl (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 26, 2013, 04:05 PM

Mar 2013

"My friends with all those neat boats in Florida will be mad at me...."

el_bryanto

(11,804 posts)

2. Sometimes people are more complicated than they appear - I wouldn't have thought that of Scalia

Reply to garybeck (Original post)

Tue Mar 26, 2013, 03:27 PM

Mar 2013

But I guess you never know.

Bryant

modrepub

(3,495 posts)

3. Even a broken clock

Reply to garybeck (Original post)

Tue Mar 26, 2013, 03:28 PM

Mar 2013

is right twice a day.

sakabatou

(42,152 posts)

7. Yep

Reply to modrepub (Reply #3)

Tue Mar 26, 2013, 03:39 PM

Mar 2013

DesMoinesDem

(1,569 posts)

4. It was Scalia AND Thomas with 3 liberals.

Reply to garybeck (Original post)

Tue Mar 26, 2013, 03:34 PM

Mar 2013

JVS

(61,935 posts)

10. Ok, if those two are on the right side of 5-4, which two normally reasonable judges are fucking up?

Reply to DesMoinesDem (Reply #4)

Tue Mar 26, 2013, 03:52 PM

Mar 2013

DesMoinesDem

(1,569 posts)

13. Alito, Roberts, Kennedy, Breyer dissenting

Reply to JVS (Reply #10)

Tue Mar 26, 2013, 04:05 PM

Mar 2013

Scalia, Thomas, Kagan, Ginsburg, Sotomayer joined in the majority opinion.

Rex

(65,616 posts)

5. He doesn't want them to find his stash under the doghouse in

Reply to garybeck (Original post)

Tue Mar 26, 2013, 03:35 PM

Mar 2013

the backyard! It is obvious!

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)

6. Scalia votes against sniffing expeditions.

Reply to garybeck (Original post)

Tue Mar 26, 2013, 03:38 PM

Mar 2013

Interesting...I gotta think about how that's separated from allowing snooping into every internet communications to look for probable cause.

JVS

(61,935 posts)

8. Is Alito a creationist?

Reply to garybeck (Original post)

Tue Mar 26, 2013, 03:42 PM

Mar 2013

"Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the court’s dissenting minority, insisted there is not a single law or ruling the court could point to that supports Kagan’s argument about dogs, which he explained have been around for thousands of years."

BlueStreak

(8,377 posts)

9. Scotus is feeling the heat

Reply to garybeck (Original post)

Tue Mar 26, 2013, 03:47 PM

Mar 2013

There have been several cases lately that broke away from the usual 5-4 mold. I believe this is a reaction to all the criticism the court has received for entering a period of heavy politicization of the court.

Remember, the court has no armies. No police. They don't have any power whatsoever, other than the support of the people. I believe Robert has become worried that he could become the guy who caused the court to lose the confidence of the public. His decision on the ACA might have been at least partly motivated by that.

Another thing to remember is that there is absolutely nothing in the Constitution that guarantees this particular structure for the court. There is nothing that guarantees life appointments. There is nothing that says how many Justices there will be. The Congress could change that anything they had a consensus for that.

We could have, for example, a panel of 15 Justices, each serving a 15-year term, with a new appointment every year. I think an arrangement like that would be a vast improvement over the current situation. A single President couldn't pack the court -- only naming the 8th Justice in his last year. There would no longer be an incentive to name 50-year-olds that could potentially hog 1/9th of the court for 40 years. And a very wayward court could be brought back to reality within about 8 years.

kudzu22

(1,273 posts)

14. More to the point -- why did Breyer join the conservatives?

Reply to garybeck (Original post)

Tue Mar 26, 2013, 04:57 PM

Mar 2013

I would have thought this was a no-brainer -- 9-0 -- why did Kennedy, Alito, Roberts and Breyer all vote the way they did?

Reply to this discussion