FUCKYEAHSCALIA
Because Justice Scalia writes the best one-liners. Seriously.
-
(via The Onion)
WASHINGTON—Saying their gel-filled kangaroo-leather palms give him “the control and comfort I need for the perfect swing,” Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia signed a deal Monday with equipment and accessory maker Easton to endorse the company’s new line of gaveling gloves. “When you’re the longest-serving man on the bench, you get to know what works and what doesn’t,” said Scalia, who under the terms of other endorsement contracts has worn Under Armour robes and penned Gatorade dissenting opinions. “Easton gaveling gloves reduce sting, increase grip, and give me the confidence I need to make the tough decisions.” Easton ended its sponsorship of Clarence Thomas following the justice’s 2009 corked-gavel scandal.
-
Photo reblogged from a splendid bauble
“Even the Space-Time continuum cannot stop Judge Scalia from his pursuit of pure judicial originalism - interpreting the Constitution by gleaning the original intent of the drafters!”
Scalia’s originalism only extends far enough to serve his personal beliefs; when it’s inconvenient to accomplishing his objectives he won’t hesitate to just make shit up (See Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990)).
(and yes, it should be “Justice” Scalia).
(Source: shandeliers)
-
This case “does not involve” the issue of homosexual marriage only if one entertains the belief that principle and logic have nothing to do with the decisions of this Court.Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) (dissenting)
-
I’m a conservative, I’m a textualist, I’m an originalist, but I’m not a nut.An interview on Fresh Air (2007), on the differences between himself and Justice Clarence Thomas
-
I do not know what “acting in private” means; surely consensual sodomy, like hetero-sexual intercourse, is rarely performed on stage.Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) (dissenting)
-
I am persuaded, therefore, that the Maryland procedure is virtually constitutional. Since it is not, however, actually constitutional…Maryland v. Craig, 497 U.S. 836 (1990) (dissenting)
-
This case, involving legal requirements for the content and labeling of meat products such as frankfurters, affords a rare opportunity to explore simultaneously both parts of Bismarck’s aphorism that ‘No man should see how laws or sausages are made.’Community Nutrition Institute v. Block, 749 F.2d 50, 51 (D.C. Cir. 1984).
-
I find it a sufficient embarrassment that our Establishment Clause jurisprudence regarding holiday displays has come to require scrutiny more commonly associated with interior decorators than with the judiciary.Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 (1992) (dissenting).
-
What in the world is a moderate interpretation of a constitutional text? Halfway between what it says and what we’d like it to say?Speech at Chapman University School of Law (2005).
-
If one assumes, however, that the PGA TOUR has some legal obligation to play classic, Platonic golf—and if one assumes the correctness of all the other wrong turns the Court has made to get to this point—then we Justices must confront what is indeed an awesome responsibility. It has been rendered the solemn duty of the Supreme Court of the United States, laid upon it by Congress in pursuance of the Federal Government’s power [t]o regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States … to decide What Is Golf. I am sure that the Framers of the Constitution, aware of the 1457 edict of King James II of Scotland prohibiting golf because it interfered with the practice of archery, fully expected that sooner or later the paths of golf and government, the law and the links, would once again cross, and that the judges of this august Court would some day have to wrestle with that age-old jurisprudential question, for which their years of study in the law have so well prepared them: Is someone riding around a golf course from shot to shot really a golfer? The answer, we learn, is yes. The Court ultimately concludes, and it will henceforth be the Law of the Land, that walking is not a fundamental aspect of golf.PGA Tour, Inc. v. Martin, 532 U.S. 661 (2001) (dissenting)
-
Today’s extension of the Edwards prohibition is the latest stage of prophylaxis built upon prophylaxis, producing a veritable fairyland castle of imagined constitutional restriction upon law enforcement.Minnick v. Mississippi, 498 U.S. 146 (1990) (dissenting)
-
It seems to me that stare decisis ought to be applied even to the doctrine of stare decisis, and I confess never to have heard of this new, keep-what-you-want-and-throw-away-the-rest version.Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992) (dissenting)
-
The Court must be living in another world. Day by day, case by case, it is busy designing a Constitution for a country I do not recognize.Wabaunsee County v. Umbehr, 518 U.S. 668 (1996).
-
If you’re going to be a good and faithful judge, you have to resign yourself to the fact that you’re not always going to like the conclusions you reach. If you like them all the time, you’re probably doing something wrong.Speech at Chapman University School of Law (2005).
