During oral arguments today,he called the VRA a 'perpetuation of racial entitlement' as if he has any clue of what that actually means.
Seriously, folks. Here is a Supreme Court Associate Justice calling the law that keeps his ilk from discriminating against minorities an 'entitlement'.
The latest extension was approved by a 99-0 vote in the Senate and 390-33 in the House... both bodies in 2006 were controlled by REPUBLICANS! Yet Scalia openly scorns the motives of those voting for it:
“I don’t think there is anything to be gained by any Senator to vote against continuation of this act,” Scalia said during oral arguments in Shelby County v. Holder. “They are going to lose votes if they do not reenact the Voting Rights Act. Even the name of it is wonderful — the Voting Rights Act. Who is going to vote against that in the future?”There are so many things wrong with Scalia's statement I don't have time for them all. But let's just look at one:
If Chambliss, or Wicker, or Sessions, or Graham, or any other Republican Senator from the deep south votes FOR the VRA extension (and they ALL did, BTW), are they going to gain votes or lose them?
Let's see.... if they vote for it, they will just possibly convince a few black people to vote for them, but IMHO they will lose FAR more votes from their white cracker base.
So here we have Antonin Scalia, that self-appointed scourge of 'judicial activism', attacking one of the most important and widely supported laws in the land - which has been upheld 4 times by the Supreme Court - as if he and his 4 conservative buddies have some special perspective from within their insular thought bubble.
And, of course, Scalia's sidekick Thomas (or is it the other way around?), sitting there in mute testimony to absolutely everything that is wrong with Republican views on race. Does Clarence Thomas actually think that conservatives and Republicans actually like and/or respect him? And to think he actually replaced Thurgood Marshall on the court.
Corporations are people, you see, but minorities actually aren't. After all, he's an 'originalist', and the original Constitution clearly stated that blacks were 3/5 of a 'real' person, didn't it?
I keep deluding myself that the conservative block on the Supreme Court has hit it's limit, but with this, on top of yesterday's tortured ruling on warrantless wiretapping, my delusion is shattered.
Let's see if I understand yesterday's ruling: American's can't complain about warrantless wiretaps unless they can prove they were wiretapped, but they can't prove it without getting information from the government, but the government doesn't have to give them that information unless they can prove they were wiretapped, but they can't.... oh, never mind. Short version: Big Brother is here to stay.
I can't see this boding well for the marriage equality cases coming up next month.
OK, rant's over.... sure wish it made me feel better.