Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Scalia Hides Hint that Kennedy was PAID for the 5th Vote in footnote?
vanity | 25 Jun 15 | Xzins

Posted on 06/26/2015 10:33:49 AM PDT by xzins

From Scalia's dissent on court conducting a putsch to overthrow the country:

"22 If, even as the price to be paid for a fifth vote, I ever joined an opinion for the Court that began:
“The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity,”
I would hide my head in a bag. The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie.


TOPICS: Extended News; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: bribery; graft; justicekennedy; scaliadissent; scotusssmdecision
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-112 next last
To: xzins

“Damn these human beings; if I had invented them I would go hide my head in a bag.”

- Mark Twain


81 posted on 06/26/2015 11:35:46 AM PDT by privatedrive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

“What future case could he be waiting for where he will call in his marker for that fifth vote? What could be so important where a Liberal Justice would vote the conservative line where otherwise he/she would vote the other way?”

I know, tactically I can’t see how it works but that is what the English words put before me seems to say.


82 posted on 06/26/2015 11:39:16 AM PDT by thorvaldr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: gdani; Girlene

Seriously, look at those words again. “If, even as the price to be paid for a fifth vote, I ever joined an opinion for the Court that began...”

What price is paid for a 5th vote that he is talking about?

It can’t be hiding his head because that’s his reaction to doing all this that he thinks is so stupid.

If I had to join the democrat party in order to endorse abortion, I’d hang my head in shame.

If, as the price for getting their $5 walking around money, I had to join the democrat party , I’d hang my head in shame.

I think he’s definite hinting there’s a benefit to being the 5th vote.


83 posted on 06/26/2015 11:44:47 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Pray for their victory or quit saying you support our troops)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: NRx

A dreadful decision which I believe will be hailed by the American people, who still support ‘’Roe v. Wade’’ and most other bad court decisions.


84 posted on 06/26/2015 11:45:37 AM PDT by Theodore R. (Liberals keep winning; so the American people must now be all-liberal all the time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: xzins

If Kennedy or the lesbo soutemayer go up for Holy Communion, the Priest BETTER NOT GIVE THE HOST TO THEM!!!


85 posted on 06/26/2015 11:50:59 AM PDT by Ann Archy (ABORTION....... The HUMAN Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Roberts is being blackmailed about either his Gayness or his ILLEGAL adoption of his two IRISH kids....or both.


86 posted on 06/26/2015 11:51:47 AM PDT by Ann Archy (ABORTION....... The HUMAN Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Scalia is saying that the "price" for the fifth vote is being in the majority so as to shape the opinion of the Court. There is no price for being concurring or dissenting votes 1-4.

The "price" that Kennedy was paid was to be the Justice who wrote the official opinion of the Court.

You have to read the footnote within the context of its annotated sentence:


The opinion is couched in a style that is as pretentiousas its content is egotistic. It is one thing for separate con-curring or dissenting opinions to contain extravagances, even silly extravagances, of thought and expression; it is something else for the official opinion of the Court to do so.22

-PJ

87 posted on 06/26/2015 11:52:43 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too (If you are the Posterity of We the People, then you are a Natural Born Citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: virgil

George Soros’ son.


88 posted on 06/26/2015 11:54:50 AM PDT by piasa (Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

see #83


89 posted on 06/26/2015 11:57:49 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Pray for their victory or quit saying you support our troops)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: xzins
It's like in the Senate. There is no benefit to being the 52nd vote when the majority is won with the 51st vote.

I'm sure that Kennedy was told he would get to write the opinion if he sided with the majority. It's legacy building; he goes down in history as the Justice "writing for the majority" in all future citations.

That's why Scalia wrote of pretentiousness in concurring and dissenting opinions, as opposed to scholarliness expected from the privilege of writing the majority opinion.

-PJ

90 posted on 06/26/2015 12:07:42 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too (If you are the Posterity of We the People, then you are a Natural Born Citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

“Writing the opinion” is a benefit I suppose.

But it doesn’t really say.

I’m glad it’s open to interpretation.


91 posted on 06/26/2015 12:09:09 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Pray for their victory or quit saying you support our troops)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: NRx
fringe nut jobs

Great tagline.

92 posted on 06/26/2015 12:11:21 PM PDT by showme_the_Glory ((ILLEGAL: prohibited by law. ALIEN: Owing political allegiance to another country or government))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: thesharkboy

Correct.

The important thing here, and it is important, is that Scalia confirms that there are quid pro quos between the Justices.

Something we all know happens (see Justice Blackmuns released notes on Kennedy and the Casey decision upholding Roe v Wade), but that a sitting justice rarely acknowledges. Particularly in an opinion.

But I wouldn’t read that into this specific case. Kennedy’s vote was telegraphed long before the case was actually heard.


93 posted on 06/26/2015 12:13:32 PM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: xzins

I doubt it means that. It is a common American phrase that does not mean bribery.


94 posted on 06/26/2015 12:13:33 PM PDT by PghBaldy (12/14 - 930am -rampage begins... 12/15 - 1030am - Obama's advance team scouts photo-op locations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
I think he’s definite hinting there’s a benefit to being the 5th vote.

Well, then we shall continue to disagree.

95 posted on 06/26/2015 12:15:37 PM PDT by gdani (No sacred cows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: PghBaldy; P-Marlowe

There are now nearly 100 posts that seem to indicate it’s murky what’s being said.

I suppose a lawyer could write something that couldn’t quite be nailed down.


96 posted on 06/26/2015 12:16:37 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Pray for their victory or quit saying you support our troops)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Here’s a thought: what if it’s a threat?

That Scalia knows there’s vote trading going on and is prepared to expose it. Perhaps after he retires (or dies - I increasingly think he’ll be carried off the Court feet first)?


97 posted on 06/26/2015 12:20:14 PM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: xzins

One of my favorite statements made in the dissent...


98 posted on 06/26/2015 12:58:50 PM PDT by jurroppi1 (The only thing you "pass to see what's in it" is a stool sample. h/t MrB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

That is how I understood it as well, plus you used the word maudlin.

Nice touch!


99 posted on 06/26/2015 1:01:12 PM PDT by jurroppi1 (The only thing you "pass to see what's in it" is a stool sample. h/t MrB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: fwdude
If the process is proven to be corrupted, do the ramifications then get rejected?

If the decision violates the laws of nature and nature's God and/or the Constitution, as this one most certainly does, it MUST be rejected by all, inside and outside government.

That's completely irrespective of whether or not a "justice" was bought.

100 posted on 06/26/2015 1:03:15 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-112 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson