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

Skip to comments.

JUSTICE SCALIA: 'FOOLISH' TO HAVE THE SUPREME COURT DECIDE IF NSA WIRETAPPING IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Breitbart.tv ^ | 4/19/2014 | Pam Key

Posted on 04/19/2014 2:49:04 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan

Thursday in an interview conducted at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., Justices Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg talked about their views of the First Amendment. Moderator Marvin Kalb questioned Scalia about whether the NSA wiretapping cloud be conceivably be in violation of the Constitution:

Justice Antonin Scalia said, "No because it's not absolute. As Ruth has said there are very few freedoms that are absolute. I mean your person is protected by the Fourth Amendment but as I pointed out when you board a plane someone can pass his hands all over your body that's a terrible intrusion, but given the danger that it's guarding against it's not an unreasonable intrusion. And it can be the same thing with acquiring this data that is regarded as effects. That's why I say its foolish to have us make the decision because I don't know how serious the danger is in this NSA stuff, I really don't."

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: antoninscalia; constitution; demagogicparty; marvinkalb; memebuilding; nsa; nsascandals; partisanmediashill; partisanmediashills; ruthbaderginsburg; scalia; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-106 next last
To: BuckeyeTexan
Yes, Scalia, has been a very good friend.

No, he has not — he puts far, far too much import on the way things have 'always' been done.
As such, he continues to carve out exceptions to what the Constitution plainly says in order to justify things like unwarranted search and seizure.

61 posted on 04/19/2014 7:02:03 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch

I like that idea. It might use some tweaking, but it would rejuvenate the court and balance the weight of presidential nominations.


62 posted on 04/19/2014 7:50:29 PM PDT by Baynative (Got bulbs? Check my profile page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

Why. He is telling you the outcome of the case if you bring it right now. So wait. We have to change the composition of the court before such a case should be brought.


63 posted on 04/19/2014 7:57:22 PM PDT by Pikachu_Dad (Impeach Sen Quinn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sagar

I was here and there was a lot of debate about the patriot act.


64 posted on 04/19/2014 8:15:43 PM PDT by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

Bookmarked, very sadly bookmarked - - - - .


65 posted on 04/19/2014 9:16:03 PM PDT by Graewoulf (Democrats' Obamacare Socialist Health Insur. Tax violates U.S. Constitution AND Anti-Trust Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

“unreasonable” - the often admitted term

and it IS a qualifying term

and all Scalia is saying he is not sure he, or the Court, really know what is “unreasonable” (searches and seizures) in “the NSA stuff”

it is also Scalia’s way of saying that IF it is agreed by enough of us that it is “unreasonable” then would not legislation be the way to say that


66 posted on 04/19/2014 9:24:16 PM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wuli
all Scalia is saying he is not sure he, or the Court, really know what is “unreasonable” (searches and seizures) in “the NSA stuff”

it is also Scalia’s way of saying that IF it is agreed by enough of us that it is “unreasonable” then would not legislation be the way to say that

In other words: "I don't now what "unreasonable" means in this context. Please define it for me, legislature."

Scalia is punting, not doing his job as one of the three branches of government.

The Court has not previously hesitated to rule on questions of national security. This is not to advocate an activist Court, just one that does its constitutional job. Its role is to decide what is "reasonable."

67 posted on 04/20/2014 12:08:06 AM PDT by Praxeologue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Luke21

Very sad:(


68 posted on 04/20/2014 2:51:47 AM PDT by ebmiller (Podcasts are the way to go)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Wuli

Clearly, you get it.

The author grabbed one small portion of what Scalia said on the subject and used it as chum. Scalia also said:

“The institution that will decide that is the institution least qualified to decide it. We know nothing about the degree of the risk. The executive knows. The Congress knows. We don’t know anything, and we’re going to be the one to decide that question?”

SCOTUS shouldn’t have to balance an unspecified risk against an intrusion upon our 4th Amendment right. Congress should have explicitly narrowed the power it was granting because as we all know, unlimited scope always leads to broad interpretations of permissibility.


69 posted on 04/20/2014 4:06:32 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; Lurking Libertarian; Perdogg; JDW11235; Clairity; Spacetrucker; Art in Idaho; ...

I apologize for posting this article and pinging the SCOTUS list. I’d ask to have the article pulled if doing so didn’t remove all of your comments.

The author deliberately took a small portion of what Scalia actually said about NSA wiretapping and used it as chum to attract the sharks. She did not even accurately quote him. I am disgusted that Breitbart allowed it.

I encourage you to listen to all of what Scalia had to say. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=z0utJAu_iG4


70 posted on 04/20/2014 4:47:24 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

——Moderator Marvin Kalb-——

More correctly” the partizan leftist Marvin Kalb”

He never moderates


71 posted on 04/20/2014 4:54:43 AM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 ..... History is a process, not an event)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

I no longer trust Breitbart. Is Alex Marlow really a conservative? The truth seem to elude him. I have the same issues with Glen Beck.


72 posted on 04/20/2014 5:09:02 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan
I am disgusted that Breitbart allowed it.

After (A.Breitbart's death) the editors who took over Breitbart "News" were not the same as Andrew Breitbart, Sadly. Just dont remember what that defining moment was when i realized that.

73 posted on 04/20/2014 5:09:38 AM PDT by urtax$@work (The only kind of memorial is a Burning memorial !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Correct. Reasonable intrusion seems to be his religion.


74 posted on 04/20/2014 5:11:36 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Kennard

Yep, I want a SCOTUS that is a hawk on the Constitution. Take me back to the Lochner Era and fast.


75 posted on 04/20/2014 5:13:03 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

The TSA exists against a completely unspecified and phantom risk. If you fly you cannot be trusted. Drive a car or truck there and you’re OK. Same thing with a train, but something about planes makes us criminals, subject to search and seizure without a warrant. That’s a security state, not a individual liberty state.

The greatest thing that SCOTUS and the Constitutionalists have done is crack open campaign finance. Not enough in my opinion, but plenty more than Democrats or the GOPe wanted. We need to win and put the most conservative Congress in place, then hold their feet to the fire, year after year after year. Just holding the budget flat for a decade would cure the deficit problem.


76 posted on 04/20/2014 5:16:52 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: chajin

Good analysis and your thinking, I believe, would shut down major portions of the Patriot Act (misnamed), the NSA domestic spying, and eliminate the TSA.


77 posted on 04/20/2014 5:20:17 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: bert

The information lists him as “journalist/scholar”, but for virtues’ sake should read “made member of the Democratic Party”.


78 posted on 04/20/2014 5:21:31 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Blue Highway
And he is supposed to be one of the few on our side... God help us!

There is more brainpower in his comment than there is in all the FReepers who express disappointment in him. Would you have this great man relegated as your own personal "Yes" man?

79 posted on 04/20/2014 5:21:40 AM PDT by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

I went to the link......Really hard to pull myself away from the conversation.


80 posted on 04/20/2014 5:25:55 AM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-106 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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