A young Democratic friend posted on Facebook that, “As a Democrat, I wish that President Obama was attending Justice Scalia’s funeral.” I like this friend but I have my own list of As a Democrat responses to Scalia’s passing. They are:
As a Democrat, I wish that Scalia had retired from the Supreme Court a decade ago. Whatever the merits of his arguments earlier in his tenure, in the past decade his decisions have been incoherent rants. These decisions were evidence of a soul who neither liked nor approved of American society in the 21st Century. That someone so out of touch with the spirit of the times was making decisions that will influence the legal system for decades is appalling.
As a Democrat, I wonder why Scalia and his Supreme Court cronies weren’t impeached for their ridiculous decision in Bush v Gore. In fact, I think a case could be made for their actually having engaged in treason. A portion of the constitutional definition of treason is, “giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States. Article 3, section 3” Had Al Gore become the President that the votes of the American people (including Florida) entitled him to, the outgoing Clinton administration had a plan already to go for taking out Osama bin Laden which Gore had already sign off on. Because W became President, Clinton deferred to the incoming administration. Of course, like Dick Cheney and the draft in the Sixties, they had other priorities. (Mostly picking a fight with the People’s Republic of China.) The result, thousands of Americans died on 9/11 and thousands more during the misbegotten Iraq war. (Not to mention, tens or hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and Afghans.)
As a Democrat, I wonder why Scalia, the great “originalist” justice, ignored the plain language and intent of the drafters of 2nd Amendment to endorse the fantasies of gun fetishists of the NRA. The key to understanding original intent is the first phrase, “a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State.” Eighteenth Century liberals (called Whigs) were obsessed by the dangers to freedom posed by standing armies. People’s militias were to be a bulwark against the pretensions of a government backed by a standing army. The NRAs understanding of a personal right to bear arms is completely at variance with this original conception. Scalia ignored this in in District of Columbia vs Heller.
OK, I’m exhausted. However, I haven’t nearly exhausted Scalia’s outrageous conduct on the bench. I’m looking forward to the comments on this diary!