Scalia Rewrites History, Claims 5-4 Bush v. Gore Decision ‘Wasn’t Even Close’

"5-4 is really 7-2" is not going to change that, tubs. You cleared the way for the worst President of modern times. This won't get any easier for you with historians.

We are the fools if we let this guy keep his job!

maybe some memory issues setting in?

And set forth for his speedy departure with clogged arteries and veins.

Vaffunculo to you, Scalia.

(because Scalia basically holds two votes on the Court)

new textbooks available soon

That said using different counting standards in different counties was a violation of the equal protection clause. Breyer and Souter joined the majority on that. The Bush V. Gore apologists say that ruling alone decided it in favor of Bush, and therefore it's a 7-2 decision.

For a 'strict constructionist' and an 'original intent' Justice like Scalia, the Bush v. Gore ruling was a complete repudiation of everything he allegedly believes in.

The Constitution has a pretty clear prescribed process for deciding disputed presidential elections --- the Supreme Court has no role constitutionally in that process. Yet he and his Bush-family pals decided to get involved anyway and essentially award the election to G. W. Bush.

Of course, Scalia wants us all to "get over it" and forget his role in his undercutting of the Constitution that he so blatheringly claims to protect.

See the book: 'The betrayal of America : how the Supreme Court undermined the Constitution and chose our President' by Vincent Bugliosi.

want to remember the truth? Antonin is deep into DENIAL, not wanting to know just how much he and and the other 4 Red Team members of the Supremes have shafted our whole nation, giving pain for the 96 months of the W Team, and causing damage to our economy, environment, and our very future prospects...Yeah, I can see him trying to blow off this terrible deed. But, millions remember it very well and won't be led astray by this heinous excuse for a "Justice".

If I were Scalia, I'd know the truth, I'd be studying how to betray it further, I'd be consulting with think tanks specializing in mass psychology to get better at it, I'd be GLOATING over the harm I've done to people, watching it on TV and laughing.

But DENIAL? SORROW? Fuck, no.

The primary issue before the court was whether the second recount in Florida was constitutional or not. The vote was 7-2 that it was not constitutional. The next question was what the remedy was going to be. Five of the justices said to stop the count. Four of the justices offered differing methods of doing a recount.

If that had been split the other way, the recounts would have continued and the 7-2 vote would have been considered meaningless.

The court only got to the issue of a remedy because they decided the primary issue before them -- were the standards set by the Florida Supreme court for the second recount constitutional? 7-2 said they were not. Only once that issue was decided did they get to what a remedy should be.

Also people forget that just 8 days before Bush v Gore the Supreme court voted 9-0 for Bush in Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Board. That case was closely related to Bush v Gore.

In other words, Bush v. Gore did not set precedent for any similar future cases.

Anyone who knows law in the US will tell you that every Supreme Court case is supposed to set precedent. Every single one.

But Bush v. Gore didn't.

To summarize, the Felonious Five knew they were screwing with the actual vote in Florida, had no legal justification for doing so, and decided they needed to hand the election to Bush anyway.

I'd love to see him retire in Obama's second term, and have his replacement be a solid liberal.

That's what we're aiming for in 2014: enough Senate votes to impeach Clarence Thomas; I for one am confident that the disclosures in the Thomas report will almost certainly be enough to ensure that both he and Scalia leave before they're tossed.

They were rewarded for that vote. That much is already clear to me.

That would upset the republicon senators.

Both of whom were confirmed with filibuster-proof majorities.

I think we should all go in on a "Hot Pastrami on Rye Of The Day Club" membership for him.

Someone needs to tell him to get over Lawrence v. Texas.

Proof of his own pudding, or something like that.

Scalia will go down in history as worst supreme court judge ever. "Supreme", heh. Not so much.

Was posted here yesterday
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002405192