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 Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Recursion

(56,582 posts) Mon Jun 17, 2013, 03:52 PM Jun 2013

I'm not sure why Scalia is surprising so many people

He is always for the weakening of the judiciary. Always. Even when the short-term result is on our side.

Also, his self-comparison to Thomas is I think important: "There are decisions I disagree with that I would not overturn. There is no decision Justice Thomas would not overturn."

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I'm not sure why Scalia is surprising so many people (Original Post) Recursion Jun 2013 OP

I don't understand the quote. It is a double negative, making the meaning meaningless. graham4anything Jun 2013 #1

double negatives are not without meaning. unblock Jun 2013 #3

"Weakening the judiciary?" 11cents Jun 2013 #2

graham4anything

(11,464 posts)

1. I don't understand the quote. It is a double negative, making the meaning meaningless.

Reply to Recursion (Original post)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 03:58 PM

Jun 2013

unblock

(52,243 posts)

3. double negatives are not without meaning.

Reply to graham4anything (Reply #1)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 04:22 PM

Jun 2013

11cents

(1,777 posts)

2. "Weakening the judiciary?"

Reply to Recursion (Original post)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 04:18 PM

Jun 2013

If there's any coherent thread in Scalia's decisions, I can't see that it's that. Certainly the Arizona decision has nothing to do with "weakening the judiciary."

Reply to this discussion