Posted on 02/20/2007 1:01:46 AM PST by RWR8189
WASHINGTON — It has been two decades in the making, but this is the year Justice Antonin Scalia, the Supreme Court's most outspoken dissenter, could emerge as a leader of a new conservative majority.
Between now and late June, the court is set to hand down decisions in four areas of law — race, religion, abortion regulation and campaign finance — where Scalia's views may now represent the majority.
In each of those areas, the retirement of centrist Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and her replacement with Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. figure to tip the court to the right. That would give the 70-year-old Scalia the chance to play a part that has largely eluded him: speaking for the court in major rulings.
Scalia does not see shades of gray in most legal disputes; instead, he favors clear rules and broad decisions.
A series of broad-brush rulings could put Scalia's stamp on some key American social issues. A Scalia-led majority would move to outlaw the use of racial guidelines to achieve integration, allow a greater role for religion in public life, more tightly regulate abortion, and strike down campaign-funding laws seen as constricting free speech.
It is a prospect dreaded by liberals, and eagerly awaited by many on the right.
"I'm looking forward to the next 10 to 12 years," said Terry Eastland, the publisher of the conservative Weekly Standard.
Though his majority opinions have been few, Scalia has been anything but silent in his long career. His influence has been considerable, especially for a generation of lawyers inspired by his championing of "originalism" — strict adherence to the original meaning of the words in the Constitution.
"Justice Scalia has had a bigger impact off the court than on it," said law professor Michael Gerhardt of the University of North
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Darnit, it's that Bush guy's fault, isn't it?!?
Not a moment too soon. Hopefully Scalia, Thomas, Roberts and Alito will be joined by another Conservative or two on the Court.
This is the reason why electing a Republican is so important in 2008. If Hillary and her HINO are in power, the SCOTUS will be totally lost for another generation.
Scalia BUMP!
His speeches and writings outside the court are very down to earth and interesting.
WHAT??? Scalia has no "living, breathing document" issues regarding the Constitution??? He thinks the founders SAID what they MEANT and MEANT what they SAID? He believes in upholding the tenets that have upheld liberty for over 200 years?? UNTHINKABLE!!
No, it's why electing a Conservative is important. A RINO President will give us likeminded RINO judges.
I pray that is true.
Exactly!
Fixed.
"I've said that I'll uphold a woman's right of choice, that I will fund abortion so that a poor woman is not deprived of a right that others can exercise, and that I would oppose going back to a day in which abortions were illegal."
Because there's a person who calls himself a Republican in the race who said just that.
Can you guess who it is?
L
If anyone could find another Souter, it'd be Rudy.
L
Remember that it was Jerry Ford that gave us the judicial turd John Paul Stevens. Now I give Presidents some leeway for regret in appointing someone who misrepresented themselves (a la Ike with the horrid Earl Warren), but Ford NEVER regretted appointing Stevens, defending him to the end.
It's worth pointing out, too, that RINO Governors appointed Supreme courts that gave the OK to gay marriage (MA) and the Torricelli-Lautenberg switcheroo (NJ).
It's worth it indeed.
In fact it should be shouted from the rooftops right about now as there are a couple of folks here who insist that RINOs can be depended on to appoint Conservative justices when all the evidence points to the exact opposite being true.
No more RINOs. No more liberal Justices. No more Souters. No more Stevens.
L
we haven't even mentioned ginsburg here -the little aclu monster-someone on FR once said she and stevens were one bad seafood dinner away from a dirt nap-maybe we could send her coupons for Peter Pan peanut butter
"...could emerge as a leader of a new conservative majority."
OK, did the SCOTUS downsize to seven justices or did Stevens, Breyer, Souter, Ginsberg, or Kennedy have an epiphany to interpret the Constitution as it is written and also not to include foreign law in their decisions?
Exactly!
John Paul Stevens (born April 20, 1920). How much longer can this old guy last?
I hope so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.