Justice Scalia: Fraud, Liar, and Un-American

Print Friendly

In March I wrote on the media’s meaningless obsession with the upcoming SCOTUS ruling on the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare (the phrase coined by the enemies of all-things-Obama). The ruling is meaningless, because as I stated about two of the so-called unbiased Supreme Courts justices:

Scalia and Thomas have all but flipped the middle finger at the nation on the subject of conflicts of interest, which is what you get when you give shady individuals lifetime appointments.

justice scalia - right-wing puppet
In the post, I wrote about how Scalia and Thomas openly pal-around with radical right-wingers like the Koch brothers, participating in their retreats, conservative fundraisers and strategy sessions, and even participating as featured speakers. Both Scalia and Thomas accept bribes in the form of free luxury resort stays, fly-fishing and hunting trips and airfare. Thomas’ wife founded a Tea Party organization and is directly connected to an anti-healthcare reform lobbying group. justice thomas - right-wing puppetThomas cheated on his taxes for 21 years. Scalia, Thomas and Chief Justice Roberts are members of a conservative group that aims to “bring conservatism back into the judicial system”. And Justice Alito participated in a fundraising gala for a group that opposes the Affordable Care Act.

Now, the New York Times reports that Scalia has a new book coming out in which he makes the case against all of the left-wing causes he despises and what will likely be his rulings:

  • Affordable Care Act: Scalia disagrees with the 1942 Wickard v. Filburn precedent cited by the Obama Administration, or the “Commerce Clause”, to support the ACA. Scalia said that SCOTUS “expanded the Commerce Clause beyond all reason”.
  • He justifies the Citizens United ruling (no surprise there).
  • He supports the Arizona Immigration law, saying “a federal statute is presumed to supplement rather than displace state law.”
  • He claims to support the doctrine of “stare decisis” (to stand by things decided, or precedent), except in the case of Roe v. Wade. Duh, he’s pro-choice.

Supreme Court Justices are sworn into office by taking these oaths (and on occasion, taking a combined oath):

  • The Constitutional Oath:
    I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter.  So help me God.
  • The Judicial Oath:
    I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as _________ under the Constitution and laws of the United States.  So help me God.

When it comes to Scalia, as well as Thomas and the others, swearing an oath of office and then giving the Constitution and America the middle finger is fraud, its a lie, and their apparent rejection of the Constitution is un-American. They don’t care to appear non-biased or avoid having a conflict of interest. They don’t judge cases based on the Constitution (otherwise known as, doing their job). Their oath of office is meaningless. These conservative justices will vote with conservatives every time, and get all the perks that go with it. The Koch brothers are getting the best government money can buy.

After Chief Justice Roberts began his new term, he told the New Republic:

I do think the rule of law is threatened by a steady term after term after term focus on 5-4 decisions.

Now, did he mean conservatives voting all one way, as their puppet masters would have them do, is a bad thing? Or did he literally mean that he doesn’t want us to focus on these 5-4 decisions?

The Supreme Court of the United States; a lifetime appointment to do virtually anything you please. You can’t touch me – I’m literally above the law.

This entry was posted in Affordable Care Act, Campaign Finance Laws, Politics, Reproductive Rights, Supreme Court, The Constitution and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
This site for Democrats welcomes comments that are on topic and contribute to the discussion. Trolls, from the left or right, are never tolerated.
For more details, see our Commenting Policy.
  • Ken

    I read this time article and came racing over to ATD to bash out a diary…

    Notice how Scalia says in one part of the book that “Words must be given the meaning they had when the text was adopted” and then posits that “the word person includes corporations and other entities, but not the sovereign.” Can you imagine what the founding fathers would think if they knew the rights they gave to the people were now being extended to corporations? It’s obvious what the founding fathers meant and it is a perversion to twist that meaning while claiming that the original intent of words should be the guiding principle.

    Another quote in the article stands out: In defending his willingness to strike precedent, to quote the article: Some inconsistencies can be explained by respect for precedent, he writes, others “because wisdom has come late.” In Scalias case one must wonder if “wisdom” has come at all.

    Well, I was going to bash out a diary on all this, but I suppose it’s time to start looking for material for a post on Sunday then…