Skip to main content

View Diary: Ken Cuccinelli says crazy conservative Justice Scalia isn't conservative enough (100 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The level of constitutional knowledge here is so (6+ / 0-)

    low.  They have no real comprehension of what it means to set up a court as superlegislature, as occurred during the Lochner era (1905-1935).  The point was reached then where it seemed that only court-packing would limit the arrogance of the judges.

    A very similar thing occurred in the Obamacare case.  Had the court struck down the law (without even reading it, as "Justice" Scalia admitted), this would have marked a return to Lochner, which some so-called legal scholars would welcome.  

    There was simply no way that Roberts wanted his legacy to be (a) bungling the swearing in of the first AA president, (b) striking down the signature achievement of that AA president, and (c) reincarnating the superlegislative supreme court.

    Cuccinelli and the rest of the wingnut buccaneers have no concept of this.  It's quite likely that Cuccinelli has never even heard of Lochner or its evil twin, the 1918 case of Hammer v. Degenhart.  By the way, these are basic cases taught in every credible class on constitutional law.

    They are not scholars they are opportunists.

    You have exactly 10 seconds to change that look of disgusting pity into one of enormous respect!

    by Cartoon Peril on Wed Jan 30, 2013 at 06:50:46 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site