Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > Political Forums > The Constitution & The Judicial Branch
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

The Constitution & The Judicial Branch Discuss Justice Antonin Scalia mocks Obama during Supreme Court arguments at the Political Forums; Originally Posted by AZRWinger Scalia made his remark concerning self interested President's during deliberation of Obama's illegal recess appointments. Obviously ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 07-16-2016, 09:31 AM
FrancSevin's Avatar
Runs with scissors
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: St Louis MO
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,709
Thanks: 5,975
Thanked 8,531 Times in 4,935 Posts
Default Re: Justice Antonin Scalia mocks Obama during Supreme Court arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
Scalia made his remark concerning self interested President's during deliberation of Obama's illegal recess appointments. Obviously Obama's actions in the case would include him in the self interested.

The remark was made in response to the solicitor general's absurd claim it was unclear the Constitution allows the Senate exclusive authority to set its own rules governing when it is in session. Of course the particulars of the SCOTUS curbing a President overstepping his authority don't matter to Obama's partisan cult followers, he didn’t get what he wanted so let the whining about "prejudice" begin.

Your analogy about a judge condemning people by name as criminals without a trial tracks with Ginsberg's prejudicial interview remarks revealing her partisan political agenda. Her remarks made outside court proceedings but still unmistakably within the color of her office are broad based condemnations of an individual by name who could very well have business before the court where she sits. We can all agree the analogy you presented shows judicial prejudice, but it is doubtful you will admit it is applicable only to Ginsberg's remarks.
Well said but, I think you are trying to convince and old dog to stop humping every stranger's leg here.

To be very fair and clear on the question of Presidential power overreach, the same dilemma came up when GW Bush was President. Being such a staunch Constitutional conservative I would think Scalia had the same opinion then. In point of fact the subject of Presidential over reach has arisen during most all of the recent Presidents in our lifetimes.

Most all of the SCOTUS court justices are known for their political alliances. But. to my knowledge, there is no recent precedent for a sitting SCOTUS justice to engage in the political activities of the manner to which Ginsberg acted in the public square.
__________________
I am going to hang a Batman Costume in my closet. .......... Just to screw with myself when I get alzheimer's.

I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN, I AM A FREEMAN, THE DEMOCRATS WORST NIGHTMARE
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 07-16-2016, 09:51 AM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,217
Thanks: 9,599
Thanked 14,595 Times in 8,818 Posts
Default Re: Justice Antonin Scalia mocks Obama during Supreme Court arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
Scalia made his remark concerning self interested President's during deliberation of Obama's illegal recess appointments.
Scalia's remarks on Obama's actions aren't the issue.
Scalia referring to Obama as a "self-interested president" is the issue.
That was a personal comment, like Ginsburgs.

Like usual, you ride in trying to shift the focus.
If Scalia had kept his comment SOLELY on Obama's action, this thread wouldn't be here.
But he made a PERSONAL COMMENT. Like Ginsburg's.


Quote:
Originally Posted by FrancSevin
Well said but, I think you are trying to convince and old dog to stop humping every stranger's leg here.
There you go again with the personal comments.
And to be explicit, the problem I have with that is how you pretend that you do it because others make you.
Take some damn personal responsibility and own up to the fact that you pull this crap with multiple people around the board and you do so regardless of whether or not the other person does it first.

The funny thing is MrLiberty HAS ADMITTED "...Scalia should recuse himself from cases involving obama after he made his statement I might have agreed"
He just balks at admitting that we're in agreement.

Scalia mocking Obama as a "self-interested president" is just as wrong as Ginsburg's comments on Trump.
And as I pointed out earlier, conservatives are creating new standards they have NEVER applied in previous, similar situations.


Quote:
Originally Posted by FrancSevin View Post
Most all of the SCOTUS court justices are known for their political alliances. But. to my knowledge, there is no recent precedent for a sitting SCOTUS justice to engage in the political activities of the manner to which Ginsberg acted in the public square.
But let's expound on that...
Antonin Scalia
June 2012: Criticizing Obama in Arizona immigration dissent

In dissenting from the court's decision on a controversial Arizona immigration law, Scalia invoked President Obama. "Must Arizona’s ability to protect its borders yield to the reality that Congress has provided inadequate funding for federal enforcement — or, even worse, to the Executive’s unwise targeting of that funding?” He also criticized Obama's then-recently announced executive order to exempt young immigrants in the U.S. illegally from deportation, saying the fact that Obama declined to enforce the law "boggles the mind.”

Some said the comments were overly political — specifically by referring to Obama in a case that was about a state law. The Post's editorial board said "Justice Scalia strayed far from the case at hand to deliver animadversions on President Obama’s recent executive order." Liberal Post columnist E.J. Dionne called for his resignation.

March 2006: Enemy combatants have no right to a jury trial

Newsweek reported that Scalia had told an audience in Switzerland that prisoners at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, had no legal right under the U.S. Constitution to a jury trial. "War is war, and it has never been the case that when you captured a combatant you have to give them a jury trial in your civil courts," Scalia reportedly said. "Give me a break."

The comments, notably, came as the court was weeks away from hearing an appeal from Salim Ahmed Hamdan, Osama bin Laden's former driver. Hamdan said then-President George W. Bush's ordering of a military trial for him violated his rights.

"I had a son on that battlefield and they were shooting at my son, and I'm not about to give this man who was captured in a war a full jury trial," Scalia said, referring to his son, Matthew, who served in Iraq. "I mean, it's crazy."

A group of retired U.S. generals and admirals asked Scalia to recuse himself from the case. Scalia did not do so.

January 2004: Hunting trip with Dick Cheney — 'Quack, quack'

This one wasn't so much a Scalia comment, but rather concern about him being too close to the Bush administration. He went on a hunting trip with then-Vice President Dick Cheney "three weeks after the court agreed to hear a White House appeal in a case involving private meetings of the vice president's energy task force," according to the Associated Press.

After some cried foul, Scalia declined to back down, noting that the case wasn't about Cheney as an individual. "This was a government issue," Scalia said in February 2004. "It's acceptable practice to socialize with executive branch officials when there are not personal claims against them. That's all I'm going to say for now. Quack, quack."

November 2015: Comparing gay rights to child molesters' rights

Scalia has regularly inflamed the political left with his comments about gay rights and homosexuality more broadly. Perhaps his most controversial comment on this count came last year when he suggests the court's logic on protecting gay rights — the court legalized gay marriage in June 2015 — could also be used to protect child molesters.

"What minorities deserve protection?” he asked, according to the New York Times. “What? It’s up to me to identify deserving minorities?”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...comments-were/

Scalia made his "feelings" clear in a variety that would have invoked "recuse yourself!" demands akin to Ginsburgs, IF this were truly about the standard and not just the latest "let's apply a new standard to the liberals" mentality.
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
antonin, arguments, court, during, justice, mocks, obama, scalia, supreme

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0