Today in Supreme Court History: February 13, 2016

2/13/16: Justice Antonin Scalia died.

Justice Antonin Scalia

Comments

[Commenter_XY]

A PSA for all you busy lawyers and law professors: tomorrow is Valentine's day. Don't forget. 🙂

[DaivdBehar]

Ivy indoctrinated lawyer dumbass. Led the charge against mandatory sentencing guidelines. Result? Thousands of additional murder victims. Justices are all the same, no matter the pronouncement of political ideology, rent seeking crooks.

[hobie]

Apprendi was the one case Thomas got right. You should be happy, Behar

[DaivdBehar]

I am happy, but the thousands of families bereaved of the added murder victims caused by the assault on mandatory guidelines, down to state guidelines.

[Orbital Mechanic]

2/13/16: Justice Antonin Scalia died.

But not before gracing us with that monumental achievement Bush v. Gore.

[Dan Schiavetta]

"I'm going to discard all my past jurisprudence to allow Bush to win. But don't quote me!"

[AmosArch]

Counting ballots over and over and over and over and over until you 'find' enough votes for the Democrat is a fundamental Constitutional right. Everyone knows that.

[Dan Schiavetta]

It was Bush who ran crying to federal court. It Scalia who (having previously denied equal protection arguments to women, the disabled, or the poor) suddenly decided to extend "protected class" status to Republican Presidential candidates.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Bush who ran crying to federal court"

Is that we cal seeking review of a state supreme court decision now?

Gore started the litigation.

[AmosArch]

Cheating is a right! I kinda agree with you though. Bush was a bit of a dud and ended up being a willing punching bag and then open ally of the Dims. Perhaps Scalia should have just let them continue cheating then Gore may have been replaced by a less incompetent Republican.

[Sebastian Cremmington]

Wow, so you believe Trump attempted to steal the 2020 election?? Is that you Lez Cheney??

[questioner7]

Yes, the dissent in Bush v. Gore certainly seemed more convincing to me (a non-lawyer).

But other than that case... Scalia's ideology was the opposite of mine, but I couldn't but respect him for the worthy questions he asked in oral arguments (including in Bush v. Gore), and for his strongly argued opinions/dissents. Maybe SCOTUS is the last place where convincing reasoning is valued, as opposed to demagogic populist appeal.

[Brett Bellmore]

While I think that the Florida supreme court was in the wrong, that doesn't mean it was the job of the federal courts to correct that wrong. The state legislature was preparing to send the (Already certified!) Bush slate of electors to Congress even if the Florida supreme court commanded that Gore's slate be sent, and Congress would have been in charge of deciding which slate to count. THAT was the Constitutionally dictated way to resolve the matter.

IIRC, the Florida legislature was also considering impeaching the Florida supreme court.

I will note that, while the Supreme court was 5-4 on remedy, it was 7-2 on there having been an EPC violation in the manner the Florida supreme court ordered the recount conducted.

[Sebastian Cremmington]

No, the constitutional way was for Katherine Harris to perform her job and conduct a statewide recount like Rafensberger did in GA a year ago. But you got what you most desired—the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of innocent Muslims and marriage remaining betwixt one man with one pee pee and one woman with one wee wee as decreed by Jesus Christ himself…oh, and cherry on top the shit sundae was China made great again.

[Brett Bellmore]

You sure do have some weird delusions, as well as a truly wacked out notion of what Florida's election laws actually said.

[Sebastian Cremmington]

Republicans like Scalia and Amy Coney Barret got hard nips and lady wood when Bush slaughtered innocent Muslims…all Republicans did. You don’t remember that time when you believed Islam gave terrorists superpowers that Catholicism didn’t give to the IRA?? That’s why we needed to spend trillions to prevent millions of deaths by Islamofascists.

Of course if one were to read the 2014 Torture Report one would discover AQ was degraded by December and all that was necessary was a police operation to arrest a few stragglers…so everything after December 2001 didn’t prevent an American deaths in the homeland which means Bush killed more Americans than Osama Bin Laden.

Rafensberger did what was necessary under the circumstances to comply with Trump’s recount request…Harris dragged her feet when Gore requested a recount because an actual recount was likely to change the outcome.

[David Nieporent]

Rafensberger did what was necessary under the circumstances to comply with Trump’s recount request…Harris dragged her feet when Gore requested a recount because an actual recount was likely to change the outcome.

Lies.

[David Nieporent]

No, the constitutional way was for Katherine Harris to perform her job and conduct a statewide recount like Rafensberger did in GA a year ago.

That was not Harris's job, and not what Raffensperger (note the spelling) did, either. The latter conducted an audit, not a recount.

[Kevin Smith]

Name three things Democrats voted overwhelmingly in favor of.

-Carnac the Magnificent

[F.D. Wolf]

Bush v. Gore was an unsigned per curiam opinion. However, I believe that the consensus opinion is that Justice Kennedy is its actual author.

[F.D. Wolf]

The Bush vs. Gore opinion resulted from an awkward and hasty compromise. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist had written an opinion in the case that would have focused on the special nature of presidential elections, according to court sources.

Since the Constitution says the states “shall appoint electors” and gives that power to “the Legislature,” the chief justice said the Florida courts erred by getting involved in the vote counting at all.

But that opinion had the disadvantage of sounding archaic and elitist. Most Americans believe they vote for the president and decide the winner, rather than leaving the matter to anonymous “state electors.” Only Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas joined Rehnquist’s opinion.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wanted to focus on the broader right to equality in voting that had been written during the civil rights era of the 1960s. He cited decisions holding that the right to vote demands that votes be counted equally.

Since Rehnquist needed two more votes to create a majority, he, along with Scalia, Thomas and Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, were obliged to sign on to Kennedy’s opinion.

David G. Savage and Henry Weinstein, "Supreme Court May Pass on This One", Los Angeles Times (Sept. 17, 2003) https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-sep-17-me-legal17-story.html

[Jimmy the Dane]

Yeah he "died" in the same way Jerry Epstein did just magically slipped from this life into the next....

You should at least be accurate and point out his death was "questionable"...

[bernard11]

Right, Jimmy, and JFK, Jr. is going to show up any day now and put Trump back in the White House.

[Sebastian Cremmington]

I heard his last words were—“the Second Amendment has a map on the back that will lead you to the Holy Grail!”

[Jimmy the Dane]

We all know the holy grail can be found buried under the Arby's in Louisville, KY.

[Sebastian Cremmington]

Scalia was in Opus Dei and protected the Holy Grail.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

If former Justice Scalia was an Opus Dei member, he lacked the character needed to acknowledge it.

If he was a member, the secrecy reflects poorly on many people and on Opus Dei.

[Jimmy the Dane]

Says the guy who just got done reading the conspiracy theory that Bush v. Gore installed Bush as President....

[Leo Marvin]

Jimmy, you really owe it to yourself to learn what a conspiracy theory is.

[Bob from Ohio]

As I said a couple of days ago, libs ever let go of their resentments.

Gore was robbed!!

[Sarcastr0]

Bob: noted for his lack of resentment.

[Jimmy the Dane]

Liberals are allowed to believe elections can be rigged,but only when it affects a Dem, and Gore was robbed of the Presidency, but anything involving Trump and irregularities in the election are just part of a big lie.

[Leo Marvin]

Sure, Jimmy, 2000 and 2020 were identical. Like when Al Gore told Al Gore he didn't have the power to overturn the election, which enraged Al Gore into whipping up his cult to storm the capital and erect a gallows from which to hang Al Gore if Al Gore didn't Stop the Steal of Al Gore's rightful Presidency for Life.

[Jimmy the Dane]

Yeah that is some magical thinking. No one tried to overturn an election and no one was being installed as president for life. Leftists have heaped so many lies on top of the lies they don't even know what the lies are anymore. It is producing hilarious results BTW like what you typed above.

[Leo Marvin]

Jimmy, after you look up "conspiracy theory," try "satire" and "hyperbole."

Enh... never mind.

Betcha loved that halftime show, huh?

[Jimmy the Dane]

Half time show was decent. Better than some in the last few years.

[Leo Marvin]

Good for you. You surprised me.

[Michael P]

Some asshole decided to take a knee in the middle of the performance when he was getting paid to perform. The $15/hour backup dancers did not stop doing their jobs. A gratuitous reminder of how left-politicized the whole league has become.

The cameras also avoided pointing into the stands, so we only got to see the VIP box mask hypocrites instead of the general public.

[Commenter_XY]

The 'mask-holes' at SoFi stuck in my craw, I have to admit.

[David Nieporent]

No one tried to overturn an election

"Unfortunately, he didn’t exercise that power. He could have overturned the election!"

[SRG]

Read Scalia's hysterical and dishonest dissent in Edwards v. Aguillard.

Scalia’s dissent in Edwards was based not just on his distaste for Lemon but on a much more subtle idea, involving an end-run around the test itself. What he did was argue that the states knew what they were doing, and that as a matter of jurisprudence they must be presumed to be acting constitutionally. No state legislature intentionally violates the constitution, so if a legislature can show that it took evidence from both sides as to the religious nature or otherwise of creation science, or the unscientific nature of evolution, when it reached its decision as to the wording of any legislation, nothing more need be said.

Once a state legislature can claim that on the evidence they have heard, creation science or its rebranded Intelligent Design is genuinely science, it can assert that the legislation has a secular purpose by teaching the existence of alternative theories which by the evidence they have heard they deem to be scientific not religious; by the same token, once ID is deemed to be science the act requiring it to be taught does not advance a religion, and nor is there any entanglement. Scalia will inquire no further into the decision process, the relative strength of the real scientific evidence, the nature of the supporters, evidence of motives, etc.