Did Scalia just dis Thomas for his lone DIS-sent?

[woldnewton]

"The very core of liberty secured by our Anglo-Saxon system of separated powers has been freedom from indefinite imprisonment at the will of the Executive," he said.

Leave it to Scalia to invoke white supremacy while allowing a non-white US citizen to use the due process theoretically guaranteed by US courts to US citizens of any color for freedom... although I honestly think that may have been less aimed at Yaser Hamdi, as it was at Uncle Thomas himself. Could it have been any more ironic that KKKonservative Scalia, when actually ruling with the majority, brought up the idea of "Anglo-Saxon"ism being the reason why we give suspects the right to due process and a fair trial... the only non "Anglo Saxon" (I'm considering the Jewish members on the court "white" for purposes of skin tone pigment rather than strict ethnic background) on the court is the one who opposes the use of that right?

I think there is not a person alive -- conservative or liberal -- regardless of whether they're black, white, or green with purple polka dots who isn't incredibly embarassed by the self-loathing licker of white men's boots that this fool has reduced himself to. It's clear he has a deep seated hatred for anyone that isn't a good ole, pale cracker. Get this "man" (a self-charged 3/5ths of one, according to some of his own opinions) off the court, stat!

[kikiek]

1. His beliefs are so frightening. Who put him on.

[ozymandius]

6. Clarence Thomas was nominated by George I.

Thomas' champion in the Senate was Orrin Hatch.

[kikiek]

9. Thanks..I remember the Anita Hill hearings very clearly.

[theboss]

2. Um, our system is Anglo-Saxon

The reason Scalia goes there is because his dissent cites law all the way back to the bloody Magna Carta. Basically, he is saying that the Bush Administration is ignorning about 1000 years worth of law and tradition in the treatment of "enemy combatants."

His dissent is the reason that pretty much everyone in the legal profession is in awe of Scalia, whereas most of us view Thomas as a fool. Most of us just wish he used his gift for good instead of evil.

[tabasco]

25. OMG, you must be joking.

"pretty much everyone in the legal profession is in awe of Scalia..."

This is a grossly inaccurate statement.

[On the Road]

3. I Think Thomas's Dissent was Appalling

it shows his complete lack of legal qualification to be on the court -- a total of eighteen months as an appellate judge. But then the first Bush administration knew that when they nominated him.

As far as Scalia's comment goes, American law is based on British law, and federal judges often refer to this fact. But the term "Anglo-Saxon" is unusual -- that's definitely an ethnic term.

[smirkymonkey]

17. As a matter of fact, not even

Fat Tony is "Anglo-Saxon". He is Italian descent, but he may have "Anglo-Saxon Aspirations" as a self-hating Mediterranean type.

Kind of like the blue-collar people who vote republican - they reject who they are and align their interests with those of the wealthy ruling class in the hope that they may belong someday to that privileged demographic.

Our system is derived from English Common Law (hence Anglo-Saxon), but I believe many of the principles underlying it originated in ancient Greece and Rome.

[On the Road]

29. I'm Willing to Give Scalia a Pass on This One

and assume he was referring to English common law. The important thing is to get the decision right, which amazingly he did.

Thomas's dissent, on the other hand, shows amazing hostility to the idea of basic human rights and the separation of powers.

[yellowcanine]

4. Well our system is based on Anglo-Saxon law (English Common Law). English

Common Law was actually quite egalitarian I believe - as was the Declaration of Independence. The discrimination against Africans (and women) was added later in the Constitution itself - only to be redressed after the Civil War and with the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

[theboss]

10. I wouldn't go so far as to call it Egalitarian

English Common Law is essentially property law writ large. The basis behind is the idea stated in the Declaration of Independence that people cannot have the rights to life, liberty, and property denied without due process of some kind.

Prior to this development, the law was whatever the king said it was. Or there was the "democratic" thought that the law was whatever the majority voted it to be.

Common Law is different. It says essentially that the law is inherent in the individual. Of course, what the definition of an individual is has changed dramatically over the years. (Women, children, slaves, serfs, etc were considered property at one time or another; not individuals).

[lefador]

5. Scalia is very far from being an Anglo...

He is Italian Catholic, he is almost the anti-Anglo in that sense.

And our government system is not "Anglo-saxon" Scalia boy, the fact that there is a senate and we live in a self proclaimed "Republic" and we do not have a king should give Antonin Fudd a hint about what classic society our system was initially based upon.

[JI7]

7. i wonder if he is self hating

[woldnewton]

12. WONDER???

Um... he is. If that wasn't clear by now

[theboss]

8. He's not talking about our government system

He's talking about Enlgish Common Law.

The man based his entire decision on Blackstone. It's a pretty amazing piece of writing.

[kikiek]

11. I recently read that he was part of that Opeus Dei (spelling?)

Don't know how true that is(Scalia).

[woldnewton]

15. Yep, that's exactly why...

And our government system is not "Anglo-saxon" Scalia boy, the fact that there is a senate and we live in a self proclaimed "Republic" and we do not have a king should give Antonin Fudd a hint about what classic society our system was initially based upon.>>>

I was thinking he had some other motivation to say it.

To the people posting on this thread defending Scalia's choice of words... Almost no one uses "Anglo-Saxon" to refer to a legal system. If you go to any dictionary, you will not find a system of law as one of the definitions for Anglo-Saxon...

If Scalia wanted to denote our system of law, there were any number of Latin phrases or legal principles he could have used to get at what he was saying... he specifically chose "Anglo-Saxon", which is commonly another term for white!

I have no doubt in my mind that this was a veiled attempt to do a rare dis of a fellow member of the Reich Wing Judicial Wing of the SCOTUS, but clearly no one else really picked up on it... he veiled it pretty well.

Lately, Scalia has probably decided not be so open about courting controvery so he certainly hasn't chosen to criticize Thomas the way he often lashes out when there's a 6-3 or 5-4 decision and the KKKonservative SC Caucus are the dissenters and he isn't happy about it...

[theboss]

16. You need to read his full body of work

I don't agree with Scalia on most things, but the one thing he has is consistency. And his consistency has always been to look at the very birth of English law and the intent of the Framers of the Constitution in order to frame the issue today. I mean, if you look at this dissent, he cites cases from the 1760s.

Scalia worships at the alter of English Common Law and pretty much views everything written since 1933 as heresy. It's not racial; it's historical.

[woldnewton]

21. K When I've read it & have to go, can I use it if I'm out of toilet paper?

Uh, no I don't.

[stickdog]

26. Consistency? What about the Bush appointing EPV?

What about states' rights in the same decision?

[newyawker99]

30. Hi lefador!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[theboss]

13. By the way, has anyone noticed that Scalia is on our side on this issue?

Or am I the only one who read the dissent?

[kikiek]

14. No..we were just talking about both of them. Thomas is nuts too.

[smirkymonkey]

18. Yes, but he owes us big time

this is just minor concession toward paying the debt.

[MUSTANG_2004]

23. Nope, I saw that too

Actually, I think people are too hard on Scalia. As someone who reads SC opinions, I think his writing is very clear, concise and sticks closely to legal principles (no one will ever accuse Scalia's reasoning of being fuzzy).

His bitch-slap of Bush regarding keeping US citizens imprisoned without a trial and his vigorous defense of the First Amendment wrt McCain Feingold should have earned him at least some grudging respect.

[stickdog]

27. Yes. It may be the first dissent I've ever read of his that I agree

with 100%.

The "O'Connor four" plurality disgusts me.

And Thomas is an utter tool.

[jackstraw45]

19. Sorry Scalia, Thomas loves his porn...

As we remember from his sexual harassment of Anita Hill when he talked about "Long Dong Silver" and bragged about his penis size and pubic hair on coke cans.

[LTR]

20. Bullshit!

Clarence Thomas is the whitest black man alive.

[Padraig18]

22. My dissent: We *DO* have an Anglo-Saxon system of jurisprudence.

Scalia's use of the term was correct, and I seriously doubt he meant it as a put-down to Thomas.

:eyes:

[Zynx]

24. Scalia is so right wing

Because he *does* have that view of pre-1933 jurisprudence. It is fairly consistant, if offensive in general by modern norms and the recent history of liberal judicial activism. For a strict Constitutionalist like Scalia, rights to homosexuality and abortion really don't have much grounding. Bear in mind that this guy *did* rule in favor of flag burning.

Thomas, OTOH, is just a conservative hack.

[stickdog]

28. It was an amusing observation, nonetheless. (nt)