The abject hypocrisy of Antonin Scalia ...

For incontrovertible proof one need look no farther than his disparate conclusions regarding two landmark cases decided by the court this week. In a sputtering, frothing-at-the-mouth dissent from the decision striking down three fourths of Arizona's anti-immigrant statute, Scalia railed that Arizona must be given all the deference accorded to a sovereign nation in any attempt to protect its border. Contrast that with his opinion ISSUED ON THE SAME DAY, wherein he held that Montana's century-old law prohibiting corporate contributions to political campaigns could not be allowed to stand.
So there you have it; if Fat Tony agrees with a state's position, then they must be viewed as a sovereign nation-state and accorded all the rights associated thereto. If, however, Scalia disagrees with a state's finding, then that state should be viewed as inconsequential, and will be afforded the back of his pudgy little hand.

It is hard to put into words how much I truly despise that smug, smirking, faux-intellectual hypocrite.