As much as I'd like to see that, after Obama wins in November, he won't. He'll never retire as long as Obama gets to name his successor. As long as there's a Democrat in the White House, they're going to have to carry him out.

He came in under Reagan, and I remember my husband being really uneasy about it. He always considered him kind of a "stealth" candidate. He came in under the radar 'cause he took Warren Burger's place on the court when Burger was made Chief Justice. It was viewed at the time as just one conservative replacing another, but in listening to the hearing, Mike realized then just how scary this guy could be. He was certainly right.

When Burger retired, Associate Justice William Rehnquist was nominated to take his place, and Scalia took Rehnquist's.

On the DC Circuit Scalia voted to end the FCC's Fairness Doctrine. That decision led directly to the rise of right wing talk radio.

Right you are! I though Nixon had just appointed him to the Supreme Court, but now that I think about it, didn't Reagan tempt Burger away with some big time job that made him retire so Rehnquist could step up? I just remember the whole thing being kind of creepy, especially the Fairness Doctrine being overturned. The Rethugs actually used the argument that demanding both sides of position be presented somehow gave people less information, or some such bullshit.

But then again, Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.

Vaffanculo!

I remember reading Posner's Opinions and coming away thinking, "Okay, that makes sense" (whether I liked the outcome or not). More, his writings on Contracts, Torts and Federalism that helped me understand those areas of law ... I don't recall reading a single thing penned by Scalia.

yes INDEED

and thinking, "What a fucking dick head."

and VERY well respected, considered for Supremes over the years.

I learned to respect Posner's legal reasoning on matters that I was/am, politically, diametrically opposed to.

Since posting my original remark, I pulled, at random, 7 Opinions covering various topic, written by Scalia (while on the SCOTUS and the Appellate Court). After reading them, I was left with a feeling that he started with a desired result, then gathered law to support that result; rather than, what is customary (and proper), i.e., use the existing law to inform one's opinion.

And from listening to him speak and reading other articles ... I get the distinction impression that he believes himself to be the smartest, most cunning, man in the universe.

so vitriolic and mean-spirited i'd never seen anything like it, seething with homophobic contempt, voting to uphold georgia's sodomy law using the bible for support!!! there's some strict construction for you.

Sounds like tony's losing it!
"First Monday of October" coming up!!!

and a congressional majority... impeach a couple of these fascists for treason or bad lunch choices, and get on with getting this country free and sound.

He can't retire soon enough.

strict controls on Senate Filibusters and abolition of the Electoral College. Perhaps if this nation does not do these things, then the nation that replaces it will.

I've got a copy of your comments on District of Columbia vs Heller. You sir, are the one standing on an untruth.

but to state that he did NOT in fact, cite legislative, common law history going back to pre-colonial Britain is just a straight-up LIE. (Maybe he's starting to go senile as he progresses in years?) To rip into a fellow Justice over this strikes me as juvenile and unprofessional. You'd think a Supreme Court Justice (OF ALL fucking people) would have developed a thicker hide...

Just a retired GI and school teacher, but I wonder how he just deleted the first 13 words of the 27 words in the 2nd Amendment? That's 40% of the whole amendment struck out of the record. (40.9%) Then again, I'm no legal beagle, I didn't follow his logic.

tried! As far as him being a Koch sucker along with his own mini-me, Clarence Thomas, that's for the money and a suck up to POWER! He loves the affirmation he gets when he does a good job for those rich bastards.

this war of words stuff is unbecoming

In a battle of wits, or in this case, a wit and a halfwit, Scalia will be the clear loser.

Posner recently had a change of heart, especially in the battles between the little guy and big, bad corporations (including employers).

He will be shaping some new law, I suspect.

Wow! There are few individuals in this world whose mere presense would rattle me ... Posner would be one of them. It would be like being a cornerback trying to cover a receiver whose Football Card, one refused to trade.

the facts and the law were so clearly on my client's side, that I probably said to much as it was. Nervous? ewe betcha.

I meant to write "You" argued before Posner. But I guess you understood.

appointed case, not long after admission, and thought: If I can do THIS, I can do ANYTHING!!!
I did, Court thanked me for my 'service,' and client lost.
No idea WHO was on the panel. Was in mid-'70s.

as he's a fine jurist and very good writer.

He desecrates the robes he wears.

Suck it Tony.

Not the least of which is that Posner is 73 years old. Also, despite the fawning over him by some on this thread, one should keep in mind that Posner was comrade in arms with none other than Robert Bork in developing a legal theory that effectively guts antitrust law. And he dissented from a decision that struck down on first amendment grounds a law that made it illegal to videotape public events, such as an arrest, without consent of those being taped.

We can do better.

him to finally snap in some impeachable way.

Nor is name calling or anything like that. No Supreme Court Justice has ever been impeached and convicted in the country's history. There have been many attempts but none have ever gotten anywhere.

It won't be long before this sweaty, obese GOP insider falls over dead. Our country will be better off and hopefully his mid evil judicial philosophy will go with him.

I await the conclusion with little hope and much amusement.

after a recent history of Bush v Gore.