Scalia: What a massive disruption of the social order this ruling entails.

US Supreme Court ^ | June 26, 2003 | nwrep

[proud American in Canada]

"I turn to petitioners ’equal-protection challenge, which no Member of the Court save JUSTICE O ’CONNOR...embraces."

It's time for O'Connor to retire.

[proud American in Canada]

"Really want more Republican Senators in 2004 so we can make Justice Scalia the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. That is one nomination that the Republicans in the Senate need to go to the matresses over."


Absolutely!

(attention Senate Republicans: she's not saying you need to go to sleep as per the usual, okay!?)

[proud American in Canada]

"I heard on the radio the fact that the US has always recognized Canadian marriage licences. So the question remains what
happens when two homosexual Candians get married and move to the US? At this time it would seem that the US would have
to treat them as married. This will create havoc and unless states add laws protecting from this(X50+) then it will just be a fact
of life. But then if the states do so then what will the SC say? It is a real mess comming very soon."


I predict a major rush on Niagara Falls honeymoons this summer. ;)

[Skywalk]

Perhaps the other poster misstated his point. That probably confused me. It's possible the poster I responded to meant that he referred to Griswold in his dissent, which makes a lot more sense.

[CaptIsaacDavis]

The distinction between rights governed by the Federal compact and fundamental rights of self-governance reserved to the states has escaped you...Curious that you are able to divine my beliefs on gun control and AA...NOT! Move along! Democraticunderground is waiting for you...

[CaptIsaacDavis]

What the major pundits have missed on this debate -- even though Justice Scalia addressed it head on by warning of a major social "disruption" resulting from this ruling (to understand the veiled meaning of that warning one must read Fukuyama's book "The Great Disruption") -- is that the last such FUNDAMENTAL so-called "states' right" (really the right and liberty interest of the citizens of those states) "resolved" in this nation was slavery. The "resolution" required a civil war. More importantly, it was "resolved" -- constitutionally -- by an AMENDMENT rather than a judicial DIKTAT. The individual state governments ratified a 14th amendment giving the Feds the power to regulate on issues affecting the former slaves (expanded post facto to regulate on "race" generally). If the LEFT wants to pass an amendment prohibiting all regulation of moral and social issues as they affect interactions within the home they should just try to pass an Amendment (which we MUST resist). However, ALL -- conservatives and liberals who still value liberty should firmly resist the extreme LEFT's temptation to create a JUDICIAL DICTATORSHIP EFFECTIVELY CONTROLLED BY A SINGLE IDEOLOGY/PARTY NOMENKLATURA.

For Fukuyama's book...
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/068484530X/002-0464355-7759202?vi=glance

[Holden Magroin]

Bush will appoint a conservative to the Supreme Court - unless Carlos Rove has something to say about it. Rove is convinced that Hispanics will become a Republican voting bloc if only Bush appoints Alberto Gonzales.

[CaptIsaacDavis]

What the major pundits have missed on this debate -- even though Justice Scalia addressed it head on by warning of a major social "disruption" resulting from this ruling (to understand the veiled meaning of that warning one must read Fukuyama's book "The Great Disruption") -- is that the last such FUNDAMENTAL so-called "states' right" (really the right and liberty interest of the citizens of those states) "resolved" in this nation was slavery. The "resolution" required a civil war. More importantly, it was "resolved" -- constitutionally -- by an AMENDMENT rather than a judicial DIKTAT. The individual state governments ratified a 14th amendment giving the Feds the power to regulate on issues affecting the former slaves (expanded post facto to regulate on "race" generally). If the LEFT wants to pass an amendment prohibiting all regulation of moral and social issues as they affect interactions within the home they should just try to pass an Amendment (which we MUST resist). However, ALL -- conservatives and liberals who still value liberty should firmly resist the extreme LEFT's temptation to create a JUDICIAL DICTATORSHIP EFFECTIVELY CONTROLLED BY A SINGLE IDEOLOGY/PARTY NOMENKLATURA.

For Fukuyama's book...
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/068484530X/002-0464355-7759202?vi=glance

[Skywalk]

Try not to be an ass.

Democraticunderground seems to be where you belong with that rude attitude.

I assume you are against gun control and AA, if not, why are YOU here?

[firewalk]

.

[CaptIsaacDavis]

Now THAT's hypocrisy!