Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SandWMan
I fear you are right. I don't believe even the conservative supreme's have a clear understanding of the intent of our founding fathers. I believe that men like Scalia are just as subject to the pressures of politics as any member of congress is.

Scalia's writings in the Heller case were...inadequate in their defense of the RTKBA. When I read Heller, I was greatly dissappointed by the decision.
19 posted on 10/07/2009 2:22:52 PM PDT by Sudetenland (Slow to anger but terrible in vengence...such is the character of the American people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: Sudetenland
IMHO Scalia was playing 'possum for THIS case by being the master of restraint in Heller. He understands the Second Amendment and its historical significance.
31 posted on 10/07/2009 2:44:00 PM PDT by PackerBoy (Just my opinion ....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: Sudetenland
I believe that men like Scalia are just as subject to the pressures of politics as any member of congress is.

Which is why I believe the WaPo and Slimes are written to reach a few thousand people in and near government power. They make it clear that they want a 5-4 decision that goes their way.

These are people who can send notes, emails, and phone calls to USSC justices, and expect to have them returned. They just have to remind a couple of fence-sitters how the wrong ruling will destroy life as they know it.

34 posted on 10/07/2009 2:55:03 PM PDT by 300winmag (Zero to abject failure in under a month. A new land speed record!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: Sudetenland
Scalia's writings in the Heller case were...inadequate in their defense of the RTKBA.

Justices often negotiate with one another and alter draft opinions in order to gain a swing vote or two. There are those who believe what he wrote was the strongest he could word it and still get Kennedy on board. Losing Heller and its finding that the Second does indeed protect a right of individual citizens (Duh!) would have been far worse than the weaselly opinion that emerged.

43 posted on 10/07/2009 3:26:54 PM PDT by Still Thinking (If ignorance is bliss, liberals must be ecstatic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: Sudetenland
I fear you are right. I don't believe even the conservative supremes have a clear understanding of the intent of our founding fathers. I believe that men like Scalia are just as subject to the pressures of politics as any member of congress is.

I do agree in the sense that I think the four generally viewed as conservative can tend toward the authoritarian if the issue is right. And I certainly didn't mean my other post as a full-throated defense of Scalia's conservative creds (see Raich). The rationale of some of his pro-government opinions and dissents strikes me as "but what if the police don't like it?" as if that were a legal argument. And he's viewed as the leading originalist on the court! [ hangs head in shame ] AFAIC, Justice Thomas is far more logically consistent and finds what he finds regardless of whose ox it is about to get gored.

45 posted on 10/07/2009 3:55:52 PM PDT by Still Thinking (If ignorance is bliss, liberals must be ecstatic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson