Scalia on DOMA (passed by Congress almost 20 years ago ago by a vote of 85-14 in the Senate and 342-67 in the House):
We have no power to decide this case,” Scalia wrote. “And even if we did, we have no power under the Constitution to invalidate this democratically adopted legislation.
Scalia on Affirmative Action (law was extended by Congress in 2006 for 25 more years by a vote of 98-0 in the Senate and 390-33 in the House):
Whenever a society adopts racial entitlements, it is very difficult to get out of them through the normal political processes… It’s a concern that this is not the kind of a question you can leave to Congress…
And jkust for the heck of it, here’s somerthig else he wrote:
DOMA is motivated by ‘bare … desire to harm’ couples in same-sex marriages
Some Constitutional rigor there, eh?
You can have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, or democracy. But you cannot have both.
Whatever Works 
He is such an ass. And a complete hypocrite. The man’s interpretation of the Constitution depends entirely upon his personal prejudices.
LikeLike
He’s a VERY fundamentalist Catholic – rumroured to be a member of Opus Dei.
LikeLike
He attends the same church as Rick Santorum, actually. And I believe Otis Opus Dei. Yup. That’s who we want to have a lifetime appointment.
LikeLike
Thomas too if we believe the rumors.
LikeLike
Versus some of the alternatives, yes; that’s the sort I want to have a lifetime appointment. Now, find me a man or woman who holds the law as their religion and I’ll speak differently.
LikeLike
Prepare to be shocked….Fuck him! Doesn’t have the power?!?! That IS the sole basis of their power – to tear down those democratically enacted laws that are illegal by the highest the highest law in the land.
LikeLike
I’m not shocked jonolan . . . I pretty much expect precise reasoning from you on legal matters. So there! 😆
LikeLike
That’s what’s so dammed convenient about Scalia’s originalism, or as he calls it now, “textualism”: if it’s in the Constitution, SCOTUS can rule on it; if it’s not, it can’t. Since homosexuality isn’t mentioned in the Constitution, SCOTUS is powerless to say or do anything at all about any laws that may reference it. Same thing with abortion. Conversely, race is referenced in the Constitution, so the Court can or must, do something with cases based on it. For Scalia, who hates the very idea of change, textualism is the perfect judicial philosophy.
LikeLike
Did he just change things on his OWN?
And this guys got a job for LIFE ….
(The US Taxpayer paying him?)
Telling people how they should lead their lives?
The man IS getting over…….
LikeLike
Scalia’s rantings aside, I’m fine with the lifetime appointment.. Once they are appointed to the Court, they no longer have to advocate or lobby for the position. They may be ideological but they are apart from actual politics – a plus in my mind.
There’s something very lopsided about this court though. It’s comprised of 6 Catholics and 3 Jews. Five of the Justices are from New York City, one from each borough. They are a pretty narrow slice of a very big country and hardly representative.
LikeLike