to pass laws like this then it should be time to prevent anyone who votes for Tea Party candidates, at least it might stop the crazy parts.

or so I would think.

to the AZ case and law, then you are correct, this will vacate any existing state laws with similar requirements and would make any attempt to pass similar laws in other states void before they ever were enacted.

it didn't want to violate.

Sarcasm....of course

I'd like to know how the individual justices voted. Doesn't a justice on the 'winning' side typically write for the court? I see that Tony Baloney Scalia wrote it, and he was one I suspected voted against striking down AZ's draconian piece of crap.

Not sure who went which way, but I did hear that on TV.

Ailito, and Thomas...

and it was quite a surprise to me. That's why I wanted to know the particulars, seeing that Tony Baloney wrote the decision for the court. He was one of the two I expected to vote against striking it down.

"Tony Baloney" was that cop in NY who pepper-sprayed the unresisting, non-violent Occupy girl (Antonio Bologna, I believe)

"Fat Tony" is who you mean.

But you are correct, a justice who agrees with the majority opinion writes the decision. I think we'll find that the poster above is correct also and the two dissenters were in fact Thomas and Alito.

but if I'm gonna mock Scalia, it's not because of his weight. I'll have to come up with an alternate method for Tony Soprano Scalia.

That's civilized, and right. I'll have to do better.

it could be considered a slight against Americans of Italian heritage to compare Scalia to a fictional crime boss. After all, who wants their ethnicity tied to a RW corporate-lackey of a demagogue?

n/t

Scalia wrote the opinion.

Still a surprise that Scalia wasn't with Alito & Thomas on this one.

I think he's going to strike down DOMA, ignore Prop 8 and write both rulings

I have no idea how he may have voted in the Prop 8 case.

Probably made his planets twirl when he found out how Scalia voted.

Rec

I never would had thought that he would have sided with a majority on this.

in this country for transnational 'fictional personhoods.' To that end, Scalia is staying consistent.
It is little known that historically, our corporations have been voting in City of London elections for decades. Just saying.

For people wondering about Scalia voting with the majority, could this be a case of where the conservative wing of the court knew they did not have the votes so they have one of their's vote yes so they control the wording of the decision? Sort of like when a Senator that supports a bill that is going to be defeated votes no because it gives them the right to bring up the bill later.

First the throwing out Genome patenting, now this.

I think this needs a conspiracy theory

n/t

About time.

"Where's my flying monkeys?" demanded the Governor!!