RIP Antonin Scalia

Yeah, but the only problem is they don't want, and are actively trying to circumvent, the "American people" electing someone.

 

"That will give the American people the chance to elect a president who will nominate a justice who respects the intent of our Founding Fathers!"

Yes, let's take the right to vote away from African-Americans, women, and those who don't own property, all of which the Founding Fathers endorsed. Never mind the election of Senators by popular vote, and the right for presidents to serve more than two terms.

Of course, lots of state might lose Congressional representation, since it's determined by population and under the Founding Fathers, blacks only counted as 3/5 citizens.

 

Ha! I take it you are not an Originalist.

 

I always hate this argument. It feels clever when you make it, but it's really not.

When we disagree with the Founding Fathers, there is a process by which we overrule them, the Constitutional amendment process. We have done that for all of the issues you note. But they provided a process for it, which was followed. We don't overrule them by judicial fiat. That's the point.

 

I get your point, but the Origonalist folks tend to frame their argument as though the Founding Fathers were gods who laid this nearly perfect document at our feet.

 

That's not what originalist judges or legal thinkers argue and it's not what they think.

 

There is no such thing as "originalist." It is merely a buzzword used by those attempting to seem more pure. The reality is that the Founding Fathers had no concept for telephones let alone computers. As such, we have people claiming some form of "originalist" idea on them.

Pointing out the 3/5ths of the vote going to black people is a good example. Dick, you seem to think that this is a perfectly fine measure of a vote based on skin color because the proper procedure was in place to make it as such. The Supreme Court should overturn such amendments to the Constitution based on the fact that it prevents equality, the whole tyranny of the majority and all that.

The fact is, every judge weighs what the they want with the case before them. I'm certain that they look at the domino effect and rule in that direction. Scalia was the type of guy that believed he should be allowed to tell women what they can and can't do with their bodies. Thus, he found some excuse and then claims "originalism" and people swallow it whole.

 

It will be interesting to see how McConnell and

Lou Reed approves:

 

If the Founding Fathers actually believed in right to vote for African-Americans, women, and those who don't own property, and the election of Senators by popular vote, and for presidents to serve only two terms, they would have included those provisions in the Constitution. They did not. So if you are an "originalist," you believe what was in the original document.Hence the term, "Originalist," not "Originalist, plus Amendments."

Not in subsequent amendments by more enlightened thinkers.

 

This is unequivocally untrue.

 

So, they believed in them, but just forgot to include them in the original document, which was pretty thorough in spelling out the other rights of the people. Yeah, right.

 

I have no fucking idea what you are getting at here.