Scalia defends his vote to appoint Bush

[quaoar]

During a speech at Harvard:

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=503540

< snip >

Dunster House resident Zachary D. Liscow ’05 rose during the question-and-answer session to suggest that Scalia’s own vote in the controversial 2000 presidential election case could be viewed as an example of the “judicial activism” Scalia deplores.

“I do not mean by <‘judicial activism’> judges actively doing what they’re supposed to do,” Scalia responded. He said the Florida Supreme Court’s decision to order a recount in Miami-Dade County—a decision Scalia and his colleagues overruled—amounted to a “clear violation of the federal constitution.”

And while conservative justices have been criticized for effectively deciding the 2000 election themselves, Scalia quipped: “Would you rather have the president of the United States decided by the Supreme Court of Florida?”

[tomfodw]

1. Surprise surprise

Scalia's just another worthless right wing prick who thinks his shit doesn't stink and he's never made a mistake in his entire life. He's a judicial monarchist; he speak, we listen and obey.

[peacetalksforall]

2. Yes.

[Bread and Circus]

3. Isn't he the same guy who recommends group fucking?

[theorist]

9. I think he gives group fuckers a bad name, actually. n/t

[SammyWinstonJack]

4. I'd rather not have the President of the United States

decided by the USSC. And btw where in the Constitution does it give the USSC the authority to decide a Presidential election?

[LisaM]

5. I'd rather have Florida's electors decided by the Supreme Court of Florida

Honestly, I've had my fill of Scalia.

[Birthmark]

6. Newsflash for Scalia:

Scalia quipped: “Would you rather have the president of the United States decided by the Supreme Court of Florida?” Um, that's who is *supposed* to make the decision...if you're going by that Constitution thingy. The FL State Legislature should have been the final authority in the 2000 election. They would have picked Bush. But at least it would have been Constitutional, and I still would have
respect for the USSC.

[spooky3]

7. Calling Sparkly--the false dichotomy expert!!!

No, Justice Scalia, I'd rather have YOU defer as you should have to the SC of Florida's decision to have the Florida ballots counted. Then the FL citizens could have their legal and proper voice--those who weren't confused by the mis-designed ballots or disenfranchised illegally, that is.

[tnliberaldemocrat]

8. Wish he were in prison..

then he could enjoy all the orgies he wants. Bastard.

[theorist]

10. I didn't realize it was unconstitutional to count the votes.

Maybe I'm misguided or something, but :wtf: ?

Is this guy off his rocker?

[unblock]

13. of course it's unconstitutional!

under the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment, people have an equal right to be disenfranchised. if ballots are recounted in a flawed, inconsistent manner, then votes will be inconsistently scrapped. so any such recount is unconstitutional and therefore, the flawed, inconsitent original count that inconsistently scraps vote must stand.

which part don't you understand, silly?

[girl gone mad]

11. No, Tony,

we would rather have had it decided by the good people of Florida, who elected Gore.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

12. The Supreme Court Of Florida would have had the people decide

by allowing the vote counting to continue. So, yes, I would have rather had the 2000 election decided by the Florida Supreme Court

[spanone]

14. Fughetaboutit......Of Course He does. Asshole.

[Skittles]

15. YES FLORIDA SHOULD HAVE DECIDED THEIR OWN ELECTION

SCALIA YOU STUPID ASSHOLE

[tomfodw]

16. I would rather have the people decide

And if the fucking Supreme Court had not stopped the recount, the people would have decided.

Fuck Scalia. He's the most despicable of all the despicable right wing monsters in this country.