SCALIA On BUSH v GORE - "It's Six Years Ago. Get Over It!"

A MOST CYNICAL APPRAISAL. Nothing if not shameless, rather than letting his appalling behavior in 2000 lie in dignified silence, Antonin Scalia has decided to speak on the issue again:

Georgetown students attending the lecture had questions not only about Scalia’s views on education, but on hot topics such as the sale of medicinal marijuana, campaign finance reform and censorship of high school newspapers.

One student asked whether Scalia believed the 2000 decision in Bush v. Gore was an example of judicial activism. In its 7-2 ruling, the court effectively halted the recount of presidential ballots in Florida, resulting in the nomination of George W. Bush as president.


"My first response to that question always is, it's six years ago. Get over it!" Scalia said. He then explained that "It surely is not activist to apply the text of the Constitution, which is what the court did."

First of all, Bush v. Gore was a 5-4 decision. No dissenter joined any part of the per curiam opinion or concurring opinion, including its equal protection analysis. Period. Full stop. The end. (Indeed, the equal protection arguments raised by two dissenters could not have been the same as ... whatever the majority's analysis was, because under the Breyer/Souter approach the decision upheld by the court was just as problematic as the one it replaced.) The fact that this lie has been so durable -- up to and including the casebook I used to use -- also reinforces my belief that Souter and Breyer erred greatly in not withdrawing their dissents when it became clear that the majority was not acting in good faith.

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/2006/10/post_1731.html

that should be on the agenda for the Democrats in the next two years.

I hate that guy.

These slimeballs are the keepers of our democracy?

After I get through my volunteer work waterboarding Cheney, that is. Remember, I got dibs on the nazi fuckwad. By the time I'm finished with him, the Lindbergh baby and Judge Crater will have been in on those energy meetings.

what gall.

BTW, don't forget to book a hunting trip with Cheney.

hubris.

I suppose Scalia really thinks SC decisions have no impact after a certain expiration date.

How could we allow such ignorant cretins to gain control of our once-great Nation???

Your Supreme Court disregarded every voter in order to install the person YOU prefer in the White House instead of who the people wanted. You want me to get over it - FUCK OFF SCALIA

Roe v. Wade, Miranda, Gideon,
Baker v Carr, et al. are cumulatively hundreds of years old. Get the FUCK over it!!!!

GET OVER IT.

And, may I add, Scalia is a pig.

Scalia is lower than snake poo. :evilgrin:

They usurped our democracy. We should have rioted in the streets, but we were either too stunned or too cowardly or just too docile. Take your pick.

But get over it and be good little subjects...

Seems most folks have gotten over "IT".

Even here. Just look at the threads attacking those of us who have never gotten over it.

When we remind them that we are dealing with the same group of people who stole the 2000 election, and plead that they recognize the possibility that they will steal it again, we are derided via false claims that we are trying to supress the vote. Sad.

the Dem Party to correct the system, after '04 we moved forward without them or msm. It seems to have caught on with many more folks. (although I was expecting 100,000 out in the street in Cols in '04-so what do I know). Still MSM have picked up on it.

There was ZERO constitutional authority for what the court did. The law militated the exact opposite ruling and any honest attorney or law school professor will tell you that.

It wasn't even a difficult issue- which is why the court limited its holding to "the present circumstances."

This man clearly should be impeached for his various unethical conduct. That's ALSO not a difficult issue.

Everyone knows that.

ON TREASON!

There is no statute of limitations on coups either.

Guess Who?

...only when you resign your seat on the Court, you fascist fuck.

:grr:

Good response!

should have just said, "Over 30 years ago. Get over it!"

...Gore would have been our President. 20/20 hindsight proves that "asking till you get the answer you want" is a habit with the Bush** cabal. The SCOTUS failed this country, and the more Scalia uses tired RW memes like "Get over it" and "not activist" to defend what they did, the more he admits that failure.

I don't get the part about the 7-2 vs 5-4 decision, but since the writer says it's all down to how you count the justices' votes, I'd say it's fitting for this subject.

edited for clarity

I didn't even know they were rewriting this particular bit of history, but it is seared into my brain when they announced their decision, and how for one vote our fate was forever changed.

...some law texts are citing it as a 7-2 vote. I guess the RW are once again practicing creative vote-counting.

partially, on one of the arguments made? Even though they dissented from the final opinion? That's pretty bad.

Do I have that right? I should crack open the Alan Hershowitz' book I have, that came out right after the decision attempting to explain it. Except I'm no lawyer, and I understood from discussions in the ensuing months that if LAWYERS had trouble articulating the case, it being so arcane & hopelessly convoluted, that the book would be useless to me. It might, however, serve as documentary evidence that that decision was handed down as a 5-4 vote.

I'm not a lawyer either, but he did a great job of explaining the whole thing. I finished the book understanding much more than I expected to, and it was an entertaining read in that he is able to hold your attention and make a compelling story from a very complex subject. I recommend it strongly! Vincent Bugliosi also did an excellent book on the subject, but the title escapes me at the moment.

http://www.amazon.com/Betrayal-America-Undermined-Constitution-President/dp/156025355X/sr=1-3/qid=1161717487/ref=pd_bbs_sr_3/104-5229502-3011125?ie=UTF8&s=books

It's only $10. I've been thinking about reading it and this clinches it!

It was 7-2 who agreed to hear the case, and 5-4 who sided with Bush.

WIKIPEDIA STATES:

The United States Supreme Court voted 7–2 to end the recount on the grounds that differing standards in different counties constituted an equal protection violation, and 5–4 that no new recount with uniform standards could be conducted. The 7-2 ruling was more important as the votes had already been counted several times with uniform standards. However, the 5-4 decision became extremely controversial due to the partisan split in the court's 5–4 decision and the majority's irregular instruction that its judgment in Bush v. Gore should not set precedent but should be "limited to the present circumstances".

gave it a twirl.

I said 7-2 to HEAR the case. Seven judges against 2 decided to hear the case at the federal level. The case was then heard, and they voted 5-4 along party lines, in favor of Bush.

That Wikipedia is tinged with right-wing lingo: "as the votes had already been counted several times with uniform standards."

No, they weren't counted several times with uniform standards. That's exactly what didn't happen. They were counted with different standards. the Florida Court tried to rectify that by getting all the ballots together to be counted uniformly. Our State law allowed Gore to select just the counties which he felt were controversial. Nobody ever seemed to understand that. This was all about State's Rights. Gore had a legitimate complaint in certain counties, and he had a State right to just request a recount in those counties. He didn't do anything wrong, but the right-wing noise machine stamped their feet like spoiled children.

And in the end, Florida STILL DOESN'T HAVE A UNIFORMED WAY OF COUNTING BALLOTS. Republican counties have one system, and Democratic counties are using the new touch-screens.

I should have gone to bed early.

And if I'd paid attention I would have seen the right wing bias.

Some times the brain damage shows up pretty bad...

:eyes:

coming from the mouth of A Scalia - the proud Catholic Christian. Educate me. I hope I'm wrong.

what a arrogant man.

Then he's too incompetent to be a justice of the peace and should be impeached.

he wouldn't need to say, "it's six years ago. Get over it!" and maybe he needs to always first say,
"it's six years ago. Get over it!" by way of excusing his sorry ass for what he did and finding the oxygen in the cave that will allow him to contiue breathing oxygen while he knows he is lying.

fingers under my chin thrust outwards to you too Mr. Scalia.

Tell the 10,000 americans and 600,000 Iraqi's who have died since YOU helped install these bastards in power to "get over it". God I wish we could impeach his ass off the USSC....

Scalia to Stare Decisis: "Shrivel up and blow away!"

And on the cosmic scale of things a blowjob doesn't quite measure up to all the thousands of dead Iraqis & Americans and the fact that our Constitution & Bill of Rights are being raped by a bunch of fascists.

It's another one of Scalia's homilies from 2001. I supposed that he did apply THAT constitution, from his head to Bush vs Gore

How dare you disrespect the Don?

... who were sent there by an illegitmate president, based on a lie. Their blood is on YOUR HANDS, Scalia!

Go hunt a duck with your pal, Cheney, you cheating bastard.

33 years ago - get over it?

We use it to carefully nuture and feed our anger and venom on YOU and anybody else who supported this CRIMINAL ACT.

We look forward to the day when JUSTICE will finally be served...

Let's get over more than a half million murdered Iraqis.
Let's get over habeas corpus.
etc.

. . . The crisis you created requires our immediate attention. But never fear Mr. Scalia, we haven't forgotten you!

As soon as we have impeached and removed Bush & Cheney, you'll have our full attention.

To "Get Over It" we must confront the truth of what happened as a nation -- impeaching you and your fellow election thieves is how we do it. We can then move on in honesty.

We are very eager to "Get Over It."

Very eager.

. . .It is one of those fascist fantasies they have to believe to keep their heads from exploding.

The opinion that STOPPED the counting was 5-4.

It is completely irrelevant that seven of them of them thought there were problems with the recount ordered by the state. Identifying a problem is not justice. Balancing interests in remedy is.

The balance of interests here?

Address problem in recount order v. the Consent of the Governed.

Five said F-off to "consent of the goverened" and ordered the count stopped. A treasonous "balance of interests."

If you ever run into the "it was a 7-2 decions" bull, don't let it go by. Please.

we will NEVER get over it?

Ya got that?

GFY moran

... but neglects to point-out that they hid behind Florida state law, specifying an election timeline, to force unequal treatment of ballots -- those counted before the deadline, and those not counted. Never counted.

Treason.

going to get over it. NOWHERE in the Constitution does it say the Surpreme Court gets to pick who the winner of the presidential race is. No where and they should have butted out. If they did Al Gore probably would be president now in his second term. If not his second term he would have had a good first term and 9/11 wouldn't have happened and we might not be in Iraq today and so many people would be a live. Scalia and his fellow judges who voted for this were activist judges and HE needs to get over it.

Breyer dissenting.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-949.ZPC.html

I'm looking for the official SCOTUS version.

On edit: corrected subject line and added official SCOTUS URL:

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/florida.html

So, in the spirit of bipartisanship, I can't wait until the day after Election Day, when I can tell all the freeptypes I know down here in MS:

"YOU LOST, FUCKERS. GET THE FUCK OVER IT."

Bake

wonder how this low-life thug Ever achieved a seat on the supreme(?) court?

a despicable, partisan ruling. Even some other members of the Supreme Court said that the ruling will be a stain forever. Basically, bug off, Scalia!

I didn't know that there was a rule that judicial decisions can't be critically appraised after 6 years. Apparently Scalia's pal who want to criminalize abortion should have quit squacking back in 1979. Goose, Gander, all that.

Who needs to get over what now?