• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

SCOTUS decisions

I for one am quite surprised that ELC follows SCOTUS rulings with such interest.
 
Scalia will be remembered for Heller. Maybe he wrote some other momentous decisions in his earlier career when I was too young to care about SCOTUS, but I can't think of any. Maybe Printz, another gun case. He has probably made some impact in bringing the notion of "originalism" into more prominence, for what that's worth. If that doctrine continues to have a significant impact on the SCOTUS after he is gone he'll be remembered for that, but if the next couple presidents are Democrats the victories for originalists are going to be few and far between.
 
wakephan09 said:
I for one am quite surprised that ELC follows SCOTUS rulings with such interest.
Click to expand...

I'm not surprised he's trolling posters he doesn't agree with.
 
TownieDeac said:
my point was that historians aren't going to be going back and looking at the footnote in history that will be scalia, on the wrong side of almost everything

it's the roberts court, it has presided over some absolutely enormous historical decisions

you are most certainly a dolt
Click to expand...

Scalia was on the Rehnquist Court for a good deal of time as well. Longer, I think, than he has been affiliated with Roberts. And he doesn't give two fucks about being on the so-called "wrong side of history", which is what makes him far more captivating than any other judge who has sat during his tenure. Kennedy is simply a flag blowing with the wind. Like O'Connor, only without the benefit of having the first vagina on the court. Kennedy is for that reason inherently uninteresting. Scalia actually has a personality that shows in his opinions.
 
wakephan09 said:
I for one am quite surprised that ELC follows SCOTUS rulings with such interest.
Click to expand...

I always chime in on SCOTUS decisions, regardless of whether they chime in on your right to marry BBD. Haven't you been posting here for a number of years now?
 
TownieDeac said:
my point was that historians aren't going to be going back and looking at the footnote in history that will be scalia, on the wrong side of almost everything

it's the roberts court, it has presided over some absolutely enormous historical decisions

you are most certainly a dolt
Click to expand...

this is just wrong

TownieDeac said:
well as you pointed out, most of us on here aren't supreme court justices

hell, i didn't even go to law school!

i did get higher lsat scores than most of them tho, the dolts
Click to expand...

couldn't neg you for some reason but jesus christ get over yourself dude
 
If you're talking about intelligence and great writing, Elena Kagan is at least as good of a writer as Scalia. And she's able to cogently make her points without being a complete dick. Roberts is no slouch of a writer as well
 
Three big decisions left for Monday.

- Scalia ruling against the EPA
- Ginsburg (likely) striking down Arizona's independent redistricting commission
- A death penalty decision that will be a perfect vehicle for another crazy Scalia opinion
 
They're all good writers. You don't get to be on the SCOTUS without being a good writer, and they also have the best writers from the best law schools clerking for them. The only thing that distinguishes Scalia's writing from the others is the snark and derision. Which I find distasteful and unprofessional. I generally try to refrain from writing in that style even on these boards, although not always successfully. Conservatives like Scalia because his writing belittles his opponents and takes those ivory tower libruls down a peg - although sadly for Scalia and his fans, all that snark is most often in a dissent. He has authored maybe 2 or 3 truly important majority opinions in his long career, Kennedy has written many times that, and Roberts will author many more.
 
Deacon923 said:
Scalia will be remembered for Heller. Maybe he wrote some other momentous decisions in his earlier career when I was too young to care about SCOTUS, but I can't think of any. Maybe Printz, another gun case. He has probably made some impact in bringing the notion of "originalism" into more prominence, for what that's worth. If that doctrine continues to have a significant impact on the SCOTUS after he is gone he'll be remembered for that, but if the next couple presidents are Democrats the victories for originalists are going to be few and far between.
Click to expand...

You neglect to consider the volume of his opinions and how often he disagrees with his colleagues even on matters in which they are on the same side. He has written a shitload of concurring opinions-- more than anybody I think-- as well as a number of dissents. That is the kind of stuff historians gobble up.
 
TownieDeac said:
you're just being absurdly biased, just admit that you like him because you agree with him
Click to expand...

You hate the guy, but I'm not calling your opinion of him absurdly biased as a result. What fucking difference does it make? The guy writes far and away the most readable opinions on the court.
 
TownieDeac said:
well as you pointed out, most of us on here aren't supreme court justices

hell, i didn't even go to law school!

i did get higher lsat scores than most of them tho, the dolts
Click to expand...

LSAT scores are about as predictable of a lawyer's abilities as the size dumps they take. That is like Greg Oden trying to get credit towards an NBA All-Star game by referring to his high school rankings.
 
obama-gay-unicorn.jpg
 
EatLeadCommie said:
You neglect to consider the volume of his opinions and how often he disagrees with his colleagues even on matters in which they are on the same side. He has written a shitload of concurring opinions-- more than anybody I think-- as well as a number of dissents. That is the kind of stuff historians gobble up.
Click to expand...

[looks on Amazon for history books about associate justices with a lot of concurring opinions... yeah, no...] OK where were we again?
 
EatLeadCommie said:
I always chime in on SCOTUS decisions, regardless of whether they chime in on your right to marry BBD. Haven't you been posting here for a number of years now?
Click to expand...
Yes, for very nearly a decade. I just said that I found it interesting that you follow it closely. No judgement.
 
EatLeadCommie said:
You neglect to consider the volume of his opinions and how often he disagrees with his colleagues even on matters in which they are on the same side. He has written a shitload of concurring opinions-- more than anybody I think-- as well as a number of dissents. That is the kind of stuff historians gobble up.
Click to expand...

As Scalia's positions become rejected by the mainstream more and more as time passes, he is going to be seen as a relic of history. Not as some leading figure of the Supreme Court of his time
 
MysteryMen said:
As Scalia's positions become rejected by the mainstream more and more as time passes, he is going to be seen as a relic of history. Not as some leading figure of the Supreme Court of his time
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
Literally here is what Scalia will be remembered for:

- Heller
- His classic solo dissent in Morrison v. Olson ("This wolf comes as a wolf")
- Being against gay rights, affirmative action, abortion, anti-discrimination laws, things of this nature that are not going to be viewed kindly by these "historians" you refer to
- Legitimizing originalism as a method of Constitutional interpretation
- Bolstering the Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures
- His brash and blustery writing style

Some of those things are consequential, but when history paints you as a bigot, many of your positive accomplishments become minimized
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top