Yup. We can only hope and wait. Honestly, I can't imagine any of the nine being more appropriate to write an opinion, assuming it is favorable, than Scalia.
Point well taken, Kevin, but note that I stated "assuming it is favorable". My reasoning was that I am very much impressed by Scalia's skill with language, and with the surgical precision with which he eviscerates the opinions of those Justices who don't follow the Constitution.
It's hard not appreciate his skills, given his statement: "Some people urge a Moderate reading of the Constitution. What is that, really? Halfway between what is says and what you wish that it said?"
But, you're right. I think Thomas would do a marvelous job.
Note:
All avatars and any images or other media embedded in comments were hosted on the JS-Kit website and have been lost;
references to haloscan comments have been partially automatically remapped, but accuracy is not guaranteed and corrections are solicited.
If you notice any problems with this page or wish to have your home page link updated, please contact John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org>
JS-Kit/Echo comments for article at http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2008/06/and-verdict-is.html (6 comments)
Tentative mapping of comments to original article, corrections solicited.
And Scalia wrote the majority opinion in Giles v. California. So much for second-guessing.
SCOTUSblog is still saying that they think Scalia has written the majority opinion in Heller. Giles v. California wasn't a case heard in March.
Yup. We can only hope and wait. Honestly, I can't imagine any of the nine being more appropriate to write an opinion, assuming it is favorable, than Scalia.
I can. Thomas. He has proven consistently more connected to Originalism than even Scalia. Read his dissents in Kelo and in Raich.
Aye, Thomas would have been better. I'm not entirely confident in someone who self-describes as a "faint-hearted Federalist."
Point well taken, Kevin, but note that I stated "assuming it is favorable". My reasoning was that I am very much impressed by Scalia's skill with language, and with the surgical precision with which he eviscerates the opinions of those Justices who don't follow the Constitution.
It's hard not appreciate his skills, given his statement: "Some people urge a Moderate reading of the Constitution. What is that, really? Halfway between what is says and what you wish that it said?"
But, you're right. I think Thomas would do a marvelous job.
Note: All avatars and any images or other media embedded in comments were hosted on the JS-Kit website and have been lost; references to haloscan comments have been partially automatically remapped, but accuracy is not guaranteed and corrections are solicited.
If you notice any problems with this page or wish to have your home page link updated, please contact John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org>