To: SoFloFreeper
I respected Scalia and have learned much from his works. He was not an ‘originalist’ per say, he was a ‘textualist’. The one area I disagreed with him is his stance on ‘stare decisis’ which he joking defined as ‘water over the damn’. He believed that if the court mad a bad decision, that once that decision was ingrained into the everyday lives of Americans, it should not be overturned.
Yes, he will be sorely missed & sadly, I can think of no one today that has the moral compass to stand firm on their convictions as he did.
14 posted on
02/13/2016 5:25:02 PM PST by
patlin
("Knowledge is a powerful source that is 2nd to none but God" ConstitutionallySpeaking 2011)
To: patlin
Was he ill? I don’t remember any news reports regarding his health. A sudden death with no explanation given. Lots of questions unanswered. If he had been a liberal, the media would be screaming for an investigation into the circumstances surrounding his death. As it is, everyone in the media seems to be happy keeping their mouths shut.
18 posted on
02/13/2016 5:31:11 PM PST by
4Runner
To: patlin
I would have to disagree with him on stare decisis as well, particularly if the case was decided upon faulty or incomplete information. If something new is learned then the decision should be revisited.
20 posted on
02/13/2016 5:49:10 PM PST by
skr
(May God confound the enemy)
To: patlin
He believed that if the court mad a bad decision, that once that decision was ingrained into the everyday lives of Americans, it should not be overturned.For argument's sake, that means he would not have been in favor of overturning Dred Scott?
37 posted on
02/15/2016 6:33:41 AM PST by
JimRed
(Is it 1776 yet? TERM LIMITS, now and forever! Build the Wall, NOW!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson