From Washington Post columnist and regular NPR and PBS political analyst E. J. Dionne:
"Justice Antonin Scalia needs to resign from the Supreme Court.Dionne then recalls two prior instances: (1) the time when Scalia joined Dick Cheney on an Air Force Two trip to a duck hunt just weeks before sitting in judgment on the suit to force Cheney to release the names of his secret energy task force; (2) his denunciation of the notion that Guantanamo detainees had any civil rights as "a crazy idea" prior to sitting in judgment on that case.
"He’d have a lot of things to do. He’s a fine public speaker and teacher. He’d be a heck of a columnist and blogger. But he really seems to aspire to being a politician — and that’s the problem.
"So often, Scalia has chosen to ignore the obligation of a Supreme Court justice to be, and appear to be, impartial. He’s turned “judicial restraint” into an oxymoronic phrase. But what he did this week, when the court announced its decision on the Arizona immigration law, should be the end of the line.
"Not content with issuing a fiery written dissent, Scalia offered a bench statement questioning President Obama’s decision to allow some immigrants who were brought to the United States illegally as children to stay. Obama’s move had nothing to do with the case in question. Scalia just wanted you to know where he stood. . . .
"What boggles the mind is that Scalia thought it proper to jump into this political argument. And when he went on to a broader denunciation of federal policies, he sounded just like an Arizona Senate candidate. . . .
"As it happens, Obama has stepped up immigration enforcement. But if the 76-year-old justice wants to dispute this, he is perfectly free as a citizen to join the political fray and take on the president. But he cannot be a blatantly political actor and a justice at the same time."
How giving that speech can be deemed appropriate when you're about to hear a civil rights case involving Guantanamo detainees is beyond me. Dionne concludes:
"It was a fine speech for a campaign gathering, the appropriate venue for a man so eager to brand the things he disagrees with as crazy or mind-boggling. Scalia should free himself to pursue his true vocation. We can then use his resignation as an occasion for a searching debate over just how political this Supreme Court has become."Amen. Ain't gonna happen. I'm afraid the criticism will just make Scalia dig in his arrogant heels and flaunt the privilege of his life-time appointment. But he really should resign.
Ralph
Everyone has of course been trying to read the tea leaves on tomorrow's SCOTUS ruling on the health care reform law. There have been no leaks -- remarkable.
ReplyDeleteThe reasoning I like has to do with Scalia and his public rant on Monday. Someone (and I don't remember who, so I can't give credit) said that his excessive angry tirade suggested that he has not gotten his way on health care; and, as everyone assumes, Roberts will be writing the majority opinion. So the guess is that Scalia was on the losing side.
Legal scholar generally say that if the court follow precedent, it will have to uphold the mandate; but some concede that the questioning at the hearings indicated that the conservatives are trying to find a way around that.
Scalia even went so far as to flip flop over one precedent that is cited -- one in which he wrote the majority opinion. And now he says that he now believes it was wrongly decided. Clearly he is paving the way for striking down this one.