"Get Over It!" said Justice Scalia . . .

"Scalia tells Michigan Law audience: 'Get over' Bush v. Gore, 2000 election . . .

Adam Henry
Jurist Legal News & Research

"As part of his two-day visit to the University of Michigan Law School, Justice Antonin Scalia lectured to a full house Tuesday on his philosophy of 'Constitutional Interpretation.' According to Knight Ridder coverage of the event, one audience member asked Scalia afterwards whether he would revisit his decision in Bush v. Gore, if given the chance.

"His curt reply: 'I'm inclined to say it's been four years and an election. Get over it.'

"The associate justice last made headlines for a post-lecture comment, when, addressing the role of justices' personal views on social issues at Harvard Law School, he stated 'I even take the position that sexual orgies eliminate social tensions and ought to be encouraged.' 'But,' he added, 'it is blindingly clear that judges have no greater capacity than the rest of us to decide what is moral.' "

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/lawschoolnews/2004/11/scalia-tells-michigan-law-audience-get.htm


*******************************************
"(A)ny appointment of a federal judge during a recess
should be opposed, regardless of who they are or whether
it is Republican or Democrat. I commit myself now to
remember that when there is a Republican administration,
as well as a Democratic administration."
-- Trent Lott, on the Senate floor, December 15, 2000
(emphasis added by TaleWgnDg)
******************************************


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NO! It's been four years of hell and tens of thousands pf people are dead because of what you did in that decision. So fuck you!

:toast:

It's about politics not law.

Boy you can say that again!! Check this out.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6857224/site/newsweek/

"Mere factual innocence is no reason not to carry out a death sentence properly reached"

A striking quote, and quite jarring to the sensibilities of a layman like myself. I wanted to read the thing in context, so I went Googling about, looking for the source, but so far I've not had any success. There are occasional references to his concurring opinion in HERRERA v. COLLINS, 506 U.S. 390 (1993). FindLaw.com / CaseLaw.com gives that opinion here: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=506&invol=390 But I still don't see the quote. A legal-beagle friend of mine did a Lexis search, and he couldn't find it either. He thought maybe it was from a speech rather than an opinion.

Does anyone know?

Rehnquist is in bad health and it seems likely he won't be on the court for much longer, so Bush will soon be making two nominations, 1) to name a new justice, and 2) to promote one of the 9 justices to be Chief Justice. Bush has a track record of awarding loyalty, and I think Scalia is a shoo-in for the Chief Justice nomination. I suppose it doesn't really matter that much who sits in that chair, but still, I hate the thought of that evil little man getting to be Lord High Executioner. I suspect he "has a little list. They'll none of them be missed!"

I'd like to see him forced to account for some of his inflamatory rhetoric.

Roy

... the notion of "precedent" as a pillar of jurisprudence.

Imagine! A coming series of future court decisions all (like Bush v. Gore) explicitly stating that they must not be cited as precedents!

The prospect simply thrills everyone who yearns for arbitrary, unpredictable courts ...

The fucking fundies who just can't quit obsessing on abortion.

"Hey, Roe v. Wade was decided thirty years ago. Abortion is legal. GET OVER IT!"

I don't think they like hearing that from me any more than I like hearing it from them.

.
It's about autonomy. It's about privacy. It's about a woman . . . and her constitutional right to be left alone, for the government to remain OFF her body. Why the hell should the government mandate that women should be breeders against their own free will? How stupid can it get?



.

Scalia sounds a bit defensive.

Anyway, his idiot remark is reminiscent of C.J. Tawny's attempt to tell abolitionists to get over it in the Dred Scott case. That case is generally viewed as having precipitated the Civil War.

The SCOTUS decision in "Gore v Bush" was about the Florida SC ruling.

They overruled the Florida SC based on violating the 14th amendment.

There was not enough time to do a manual ballet count and meet the deadline to certify the Florida electoral college votes to be counted thus, the whole state would be disenfranchised.

Florida SC was overruled, the election was already certified, electoral votes certified by Harris and Brother Jeb. Sent to the congressional archives. Done deal.

Even if the Florida SC was not overruled by SCOTUS, the Florida state legislators were ready to certify the electoral votes as per the US Constitution.

Gore was done..........