Constitutional giant Antonin Scalia has passed away this week, and while many immediately turned toward the prospects of his replacements, less interest has been placed on the great influence that we have lost.
As the court’s most devout defender of the constitution, Antonin’s passing may very well mark the passing of the Constitution’s role as the central document through which each decision must be weighed.
With Scalia’s death, the court has been turned over its now-liberal majority, and their belief that the constitution contains what they think it ought to contain, rather than what it actually says.
Scalia often proved this point with the cutting style for which he was well known. When confronted by people who morally oppose the judge’s decisions, Scalia would respond in a way that made clear the distinctions of want and constitutional need, “I even take the position that sexual orgies eliminate social tensions and ought to be encouraged,” he once said. He never did, however, make sexual orgies a legal requirement.
In his Obergefell v. Hodges dissent, he accused the liberal judges that made up the majority of not respecting that distinction, claiming their position lacked even the “thin veneer of law.”
The loss of Antonin Scalia further explains the tragic loss for constitutionalists across the country. Move on to the next page:
WE THE PEOPLE CANNOT let them CHANGE OUR CONSTITUTION!!!!! It has been good for all these years, what makes them think THEY have the right to change it?!? This is one of the reasons the people think obama is dictator-like! HE thinks the constitution is outdated! NO, it’s NOT!! We DON’T WANT HIM OR ANYONE ELSE PERVERTING IT TO FIT THEIR AGENDA!!!!
You can believe that
Not if we bold it as dear as he did ! In the end it’s worth dying for , without it we have nothing anyway
Only if we let it…..
February 14, 2016
Dems in Senate passed a resolution in1960 against election year Supreme Court appointments
By Thomas Lifson
Read it and weep, Democrats. The shoe is on the other foot. David Bernstein at the Washington Post’s Volokh Conspiracy blog:
Thanks to a VC commenter, I discovered that in August 1960, the Democrat-controlled Senate passed a resolution, S.RES. 334, “Expressing the sense of the Senate that the president should not make recess appointments to the Supreme Court, except to prevent or end a breakdown in the administration of the Court’s business.” Each of President Eisenhower’s SCOTUS appointments had initially been a recess appointment who was later confirmed by the Senate, and the Democrats were apparently concerned that Ike would try to fill any last-minute vacancy that might arise with a recess appointmen
I didn’t see this one coming. Wow Obama is evil
I swore an oath to protect this Country against Foreign and Domestic enemies…That Oath never goes away…….Protect the Constitution so help me God.
Well, I guess it will come down to who blinks first. Finicum should’ ve been an eye opener for Pro-Constututionist. We were warned of wolves long ago, but somehow wasn’t watching the henhouse close enough.
This Country’s leader’s will not get away with it as long as we have armed Patriots with air in our lungs ready to fight for what this Country was founded on !!!!
No not for me ,I was born free and I will die free