Antonin Scalia Dies And I Did A Guilty Dance: Federal Supreme Court Posed To Change Hands
Ok, I will admit it, I have often said that the best thing that could happen to the current Federal Supreme Court would be the death of Scalia. I didn’t think I would be gifted in such a big way, but it was more than past time for a change, and the only way that happens in the Supreme Court is through death. (Is it a sucky job if people have to wish for your death to have you removed? ) I can’t say that I wished for his death, but I can say that I celebrated today.
Scalia is one of the worst misogynists and bigots on the court, and I think the second is a tie between Clarence Thomas who silenced his sexual assault victim when he acting as judge in her child custody case threatened to take her children if she reported the sexual assault. From my blog post below:
It’s a frightening level of manipulation and power to wield against the public, and it’s been unchecked. Clarence Thomas still argues he did nothing wrong, even when Anita Hill provided evidence that he sexually harassed her. Another woman was sexually abused by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas (just writing that makes me gag), and an incredible power structure because he was judge prevented her from testifying, according to a Time magazine article:
In an interview with TIME last week, Savage recalled her meeting with Brock in the lobby of the Marriott Hotel in downtown Washington in 1994. A book titled Strange Justice, by reporters Jane Mayer and Jill Abramson, had just come out — and it used on-the-record interviews to argue persuasively that Thomas had indeed subjected a number of women to frequent sexually explicit remarks about porno videos. Savage, a black mid-level aide in the Reagan Administration, told both the authors and the Judiciary Committee (although she wasn’t called to testify publicly) that when she went to Thomas’ apartment in the early 1980s, the place was littered with graphic photos of nude women. When Savage met Brock, she says, he let her know he could ruin her. “He knew all this personal stuff,” she says. “He wanted me to take back what I had said. I couldn’t — it was true — but I was intimidated, and so I faxed him something innocuous. I was scared.”
or Alito/Stevens who believe that the while male majority rules in every case. https://unaskedadvice.wordpress.com/2010/04/20/supreme-court-says-federally-funded-student-groups-can-deny-homosexuals-memberships/
Can you blame me for being happy that Scalia died a natural death, and a new position on the court has opened up? We will never know, for sure, if it was truly a natural death, because an autopsy was refused and the official who declared him dead never actually saw the body, just took the officer-on-the-scene’s word for it.
Meanwhile, Guevara acknowledged that she pronounced Scalia dead by phone, without seeing his body. Instead, she spoke to law enforcement officials at the scene — who assured her “there were no signs of foul play” — and Scalia’s physician in Washington, who said that the 79-year-old justice suffered from a host of chronic conditions.
Apparently it was rumored that Scalia died of a heart attack, but that wasn’t confirmed. No matter. The seat is open.
Scalia is the man who claimed that black students would do better at lower tier colleges:
In December 2015, Scalia drew a lot of attention when, during an affirmative action case, he opted to include the factually unmoored claims of a brief arguing against affirmative action programs in a question he posed from the bench. Many people did not like it. Audible gasps were heard. In case this has slipped your memory, here is what Scalia said:
“There are those who contend that it does not benefit African Americans to get them into the University of Texas [Austin] where they do not do well, as opposed to having them go to a less advanced school, a less – a slower track school where they do well. ‘
Sounds like eugenics at work, but perhaps not. Perhaps Scalia just sucked at anything having to do with civil rights, being a racist. Some news outlets have called him a brilliant legal mind, but the ability use your words to coerce people to abuse others is also a trait used by despots and dictators, not necessarily a point of pride for a Supreme Court Justice.
Scalia used a calculated form of racist fear mongering to get himself promoted to the Federal Supreme Court :
A Nixon appointment brought Scalia into the fold of the federal government — a fact worth noting when contemplating Scalia’s reputation as an enemy of civil rights. Nixon has his own complex civil rights legacy. But he and his political advisers devised and implemented the by now well-documented collection of political tactics that sought to engage white voters and win elections by stoking racial animus and anxieties. This is not an interpretation. This is how Nixon’s own advisers described their activities. And these practices remain an active part of American politics today. The fact is, in the 2016 race, the tactics — known collectively as the Southern Strategy — have quite possibly played a more overt and influential role than they have in decades.
Let’s not forget what kind of man Scalia was, a racist, an enemy of civil rights and women’s rights. Take his view on homosexuality as being linked with bestiality:
Scalia claimed that overturning sodomy laws — which actually made a range of consensual sexual acts, even between heterosexual adults, illegal — imperiled state laws barring bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, bestiality and obscenity.
It’s not entirely surprising that Scalia would get these details confused same sex marriage/bestiality when he purposefully limited his news outlets if they were “too liberal.” Science-Schmience.
It is disturbing that now that he is dead, the tributes that come out downplay his Scalia’s egomania and aryan belief systems:
Former US Senator from Texas, Kay Bailey Hutchison, described Scalia as “one of the smartest, funniest justices ever on the US Supreme Court.’’
Chief Justice John Roberts described Scalia as “an extraordinary individual and jurist, admired and treasured by his colleagues.’’ Of course, I think Roberts is a die-hard KKK member, but he covers it well.
Let’s not forget that Scalia says that people should be segregated based on skin color, have less access to education, equates same sex marriage with incest and bestiality, fought to overturn Roe v. Wade, and argued that the 14th Amendment didn’t apply to women:
Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn’t. Nobody ever thought that that’s what it meant. Nobody ever voted for that. If the current society wants to outlaw discrimination by sex, hey we have things called legislatures, and they enact things called laws. You don’t need a constitution to keep things up-to-date. All you need is a legislature and a ballot box.
I wonder what Scalia felt the Constitution was good for, unless it was to protect only the white men and big business interests. Just a reminder, this is what the 14th Amendment states:
“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Funny, last I checked, a woman is a person, and as such, she should be protected by the Constitution. If women weren’t people, then perhaps the 14th Amendment wouldn’t apply, but Scalia never argued that women weren’t people, just that their rights weren’t protected. I wonder why, based on gender, a person wouldn’t be protected. By Scalia’s logic, only a man is a person whose rights are protected?
While he may be missed by many, he won’t be missed by those of us who really believe that the Constitution protects all of us, not just the white men who wrote it. Hey, we really believe in equality for all, and perhaps we will have a justice who does now, too.