Scalia Ridicules Court's Gay Sex Ruling

AP ^ | 10/25/03 | AP

[Cyrus the Great]

WASHINGTON - Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (news - web sites) ridiculed his court's recent ruling legalizing gay sex, telling an audience of conservative activists Thursday that the ruling ignores the Constitution in favor of a modern, liberal sensibility. The ruling, Scalia said, "held to be a constitutional right what had been a criminal offense at the time of the founding and for nearly 200 years thereafter."

Scalia adopted a mocking tone to read from the court's June ruling that struck down state antisodomy laws in Texas and elsewhere.

Scalia wrote a bitter dissent in the gay sex case that was longer than the ruling itself.

On Thursday, Scalia said judges, including his colleagues on the Supreme Court, throw over the original meaning of the Constitution when it suits them.

"Most of today's experts on the Constitution think the document written in Philadelphia in 1787 was simply an early attempt at the construction of what is called a liberal political order," Scalia told a gathering of the Intercollegiate Studies Institute.

"All that the person interpreting or applying that document has to do is to read up on the latest academic understanding of liberal political theory and interpolate these constitutional understandings into the constitutional text."

Scalia is a hero of conservatives who favor a strict adherence to the actual text of the Constitution.

The 50-year-old Intercollegiate Studies Institute is a private conservative education organization that sponsors lectures and conferences and scholarships. The group says its mission is to, "enhance the rising generation's knowledge of our nation's founding principles — limited government, individual liberty, personal responsibility, free enterprise (news - web sites) and Judeo-Christian moral standards."

ISI draws much of its funding from conservative foundations, including three controlled by or associated with billionaire philanthropist Richard Mellon Scaife, a vehement critic of former President Clinton (news - web sites).

Scalia spoke after standing with some 800 others to recite the Pledge of Allegiance.

The Supreme Court announced last week that it will hear a case testing the constitutionality of the current version of the pledge as it is recited in public schools and that Scalia will not take part.

Scalia apparently sidelined himself because of remarks he made earlier this year critical of a lower court ruling in the case. The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (news - web sites) had found the pledge was unconstitutional in public school classroom because of the phrase, "one nation, under God."

The Supreme Court could decide to strip the words "under God" from the patriotic oath or rule that the mention of God does not violate the notion of separation of church and state.

[lilylangtree]

Salute Antonin Scalia!!!!

[WinOne4TheGipper]

I believe it's: Scalia Ping

[2timothy3.16]

Salute Antonin Scalia!!!!

Ya, bu now ginsberg will never talk to him. Hey, on second thought that's not a punishment, that's a reward.

Salute Antonin Scalia!!!!

[2timothy3.16]

Wasn't ginsberg an aclu lawyer once a while back? If so how come she doesn't sideline herself when they are in court?

[ReleaseTheHounds]

I was there... it was GREAT! Scalia is the MAN!

[DonQ]

Scalia seems a trifle inconsistent. He was pleased that the Supreme Court has upheld the death penalty; he even said that trial judges with reservations about the death penalty should resign because the death penalty had been officially upheld by the Supreme Court.

Yet the right to an abortion has also been upheld, repeatedly, by the same Supreme Court and Scalia hasn't told judges with reservations about abortion to resign ... and hasn't resigned himself.

And here the Supreme Court has upheld the right to privacy, even with same sex couples, a decision that did not exactly legalize homosexual relations but effectively crippled most of the mechanism for prosecuting it; Scalia evidently has his own reservations and isn't telling people to get in line with the Supreme Court majority or anything like that.

[ThreeYearLurker]

The Supreme Court announced last week that it will hear a case testing the constitutionality of the current version of the pledge as it is recited in public schools and that Scalia will not take part.

Scalia apparently sidelined himself because of remarks he made earlier this year critical of a lower court ruling in the case. The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (news - web sites) had found the pledge was unconstitutional in public school classroom because of the phrase, "one nation, under God."

This can't be a good thing.

[Ravenstar]

Does anyone realize that unless the European 5 are impeached that no judge will be able to be held to that document ever again? Congress will not move articles of impeachment! Why, the disregard of the Constitution is blatant! Feeney (24th District Florida-R) is a hopeless lawyer,on the Judiciary Committee!, trying to appear as a conservative dedicated to the Constitution but I can assure you he is for appearances only. Nothing of Substance will come from this longtime lawyer who is more concerned with himself than his constituents. He is like most of the rest of the vermin in Congress give lip service to the Constitution, complain they have the nerve to do the same anti-constitutional thing to him and then forget about taking any action to correct the violation.

TSA is a direct violation of the Constitution! He was informed of this as soon as he got into office yet nothing has come from him or his office on this violation either!
TSA violates the 4th Amendment a couple million times a day!
IT DOESNT TAKE LAWYER TO INTERPRET THE CONSTITUTION!! The Founding Fathers wrote it in plain and simple language. Any literate person knows what it means! Press the vermin to get off of their backends and protect and defend the Constitution as their oath states, from which their authority comes from. ! CALL YOUR CONGRESS CRITTER! If they ignore this responsibility to the Constitution then they forfeit their authority to enact binding legislation.


Ravenstar

[Capt. Jake]

Scalia inconsistent? Not on your life. Capital punishment was not prohibited by the Constitution at its ratification. If it had been, there would ne no need to require due process before depriving one of his life. Thus, the court, with a breif deviation in the 70's, has simply followed the original intent.

There simply were no rights to abortion or privacy in the Constitution, as evidenced by the laws against abortion and private sodomy that were in place then and for decades thereafter. Scalia rightfully treats the Court's opinion creating new "rights" with contempt. After all, the passage of time does not render legitimate something illegitimately conceived,

[ErnBatavia]

I wouldn't want this talking to me either...

[GluteusMax]

Scalia is a hero of conservatives who favor a strict adherence to the actual text of the Constitution.

They say this like it's a strange concept. To actually uphold and defend the constitution like they've all sworn to do. The traitors who do not strictly adhere to the actual text should be dealt with accordingly. (Of course that would require a spine.) The winds of CW 2 are blowing.

[aimhigh]

I'm beginning to think that Scalia is not real bright. By speaking out on these issues, he disqualifies himself from these issues in the future. We will lose the pledge of allegiance case because he couldn't hold his tongue.

[Hildy]

He's already recused himself from the case. Not too bright? LOL.

[Zeroisanumber]

Unusual for a justice to take the rest of the Supreme Court to task in a public forum.

[Zeroisanumber]

Unusual for a justice to take the rest of the Supreme Court to task in a public forum.

[Ravenstar]

No very bright, He all by himself cannot do it! The people have got to call their representatives and Senators on this! If you do nothing, nothing will get done. It is going to take the people now insisting that Congress lives up to its oath! One Justice, as shown by 5 Justices ruling on the basis of European Law and fashion, cannot not now stem the tide! So much for Republican appointed Justices! They won't fight for them so we end up with socialists ignoring the Constitution in place. 7 of the 9 Justices are Republican appointed! Call the Congress Critters and demand that the 5 be impeached for failing their oath. This is directly demonstrable by their own writings!

Ravenstar

[the lone wolf]

Ruth Bader Ginsberg is the founding head of the ACLU Reproductive Rights Project. She should, therefore, recuse herself from any case involving abortion or birth control, but she has not and will not. The media consistently called her a "moderate" duting her confirmation hearings before the Senate.

[aimhigh]

No very bright, He all by himself cannot do it!

Scalia's vote would have secured a victory. Now, he can't vote. His votes are more important than his speeches. He's preaching to the choir.

[Ravenstar]

The choir, as you put it, has got to go out and DO something, like maintain constant pressure on the Congressman about impeaching the European 5! It is easy to talk but the conditions that exist in this country are partially each of our faults for our inaction! I have already been and continue to pressure my Congress Critter! He obviously is reticent but more will become involved. When enough become involved the tide will turn. Do you believe in the Constitution or are you like your Congress Critter and only pay it lip service?

Ravenstar