OpEdNews Op Eds

RAGING BULL: Radical Activist Jurist Antonin Scalia, Legislating from the Bench

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 1 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to None 3/2/13

- Advertisement -

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's obnoxious remark Wednesday about the Voting Rights Act as a "perpetuation of racial entitlement" wasn't the half of it.

Scalia is often held up by self-described "conservatives" as a model jurist, setting the standard for the type of "strict constructionism" or "originalist" interpretation of the Constitution that Republicans would like to see more of on the bench.

Jurists like Scalia, the pretend argument goes, are the antidote to those "liberal activist judges" who don't appreciate the limited authority of the judicial branch and who abuse their position in order to usurp the power of the executive and/or legislative branches by -- gasp! -- "legislating from the bench!"

Wednesday's shameful display by Scalia, however, during the Shelby v. Holder  hearing at the U.S. Supreme Court, on whether or not Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) ought to be discontinued, should serve to put the bald hypocrisy of that entire Republican myth to bed for good. The Supreme Court Justice beloved by the hard right demonstrated exactly why that hard right loves him -- and it has nothing to do with "conservatism" or "judicial restraint" or "strict constructionism" or any of those other absurd partisan talking points bandied about in regard to Scalia...

The case out of Shelby County, AL was brought before SCOTUS by wealthy Rightwing activists who hope to use it to finally gut the section of the VRA which requires all or parts of 16 states, predominantly in the South, largely due to their long history of racial discrimination, to receive pre-clearance for all new election-related laws from either a federal court or the U.S. Dept. of Justice before they can be put into practice.

- Advertisement -

Section 5 is part of a nearly 50-year old bi-partisan bill that almost all observers, Right, Left and otherwise, see as a smashing success to date. Even the bulk of those on today's Supreme Court who now oppose all or parts of the Act, recognize that it has been the cornerstone of civil rights law in this country for half a century and has done a remarkable job of restoring equal justice for many after the long and insidious evils of slavery and the more than a century of racism and disenfranchisement that followed it.

So popular is this law that when it was most recently re-authorized for another 25 years in 2006, it was supported 98 to 0 -- 98 to 0! -- in the U.S. Senate, after a 10 month process of hearings and deliberation in the U.S. House as led by the Republican chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

So there was a loud chorus of gasps, literal and otherwise, in the wake of Scalia's offensive and inaccurate remark during Wednesday's hearing when he charged that the Voting Rights Act, presumably Section 5 specifically, but he was speaking of the bill in its entirety at the time, served as little more than a "perpetuation of racial entitlement."

Offensive and inaccurate as that comment on its own might have been, there was much -- much -- more wrong with his commentary, almost all of which serves to absolutely destroy the notion that Scalia represents the type of jurisprudence that either he or his supporters claim.

*Please go to The Brad Blog to read the rest of this article.
- Advertisement -

 

http://www.bradblog.com

Brad Friedman publishes Bradblog.com

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon


Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Tale of the Tapes: Wisconsin's 'Dog-and-Pony Show' Faith-Based Supreme Court Election 'Recount'

Rep. Allen West Refuses to Concede, Seeks Hand-Count, Impounding of Ballots and Voting Systems in FL-18 U.S. House Race

GOP Voter Registration Strategy -- Lying to Potential Voters About 'Taking a Poll' to Screen Out Obama Supporters

EXCLUSIVE: Virginia Officials Confirm Criminal Election Fraud Investigation of Gingrich Campaign

Paper Ballot Op-Scan Election Results Flipped After Recount Finds New Tally 'Extremely Favors Opposite Candidate'

Another Cold Blast of "Global Warming is a Hoax!" Nonsense to Grip Parts of the Gullible U.S.

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
1 people are discussing this page, with 1 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

The Voting Rights Act (VRA) must be upheld by the ... by ajain31 on Friday, Mar 8, 2013 at 12:12:02 PM