Saturday, 20 March, 2004

Scalia vs the Op-Eds I was willing to take Justice Scalia at his word, however tardy and there being so many of them pdf (off the SCOTUS What's New page). The Op-Ed pages of the Washington Post Mr. Scalia's Objectivity and NY Times Justice in a Bind, were not. Both noted, with very little sentimentality, that even with his explanations and insistencies of probity, that the situation didn't look good and couldn't be made to look good. Off hand I'm a little surprised. I had thought that having risen to descending to the level of the common rabble by issuing them an edifying particular statement on the matter most folk would just say 'duly noted' file his screed away and await the decision on the energy task force so that the appropriate asterisk could be placed against the result. I don't know the history of how Washington regards the social life of the members Supreme Court. I would not want to invite or accept legacy examples from the gilded era to the case. All the same I don't regard them as having taken orders along with the robe and withdrawn from the world into some legal monastery. However the sort of people who write for editorial pages are part of the social class that form the greater court of King _, and do know these things. I get the impression they didn't like being lectured. Justice Scalia epitomizes the new imperial attitude in washington better than anyone else. An attitude and burgeoning era that prizes honors and priviledge, gifts and boon opportunites. If George Washington and Thomas Jefferson are called the fathers of American Democracy, Call Antonin Scalia and Richard Cheney fathers of American Timocracy. 11:30:22 PM    comment [];trackback [];

© Copyright 2004 Paul Bushmiller. Last update: 3/26/04; 00:09:01.