If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   "Scalia told C-SPAN that justices often cite newspaper articles and other 'public materials' in their opinions." Subby has suspicions about the websites they've been visiting   (content.usatoday.com) divider line 48
    More: Scary, Oklahoma City Bombing, Justice Department, news stories, opinions, oval  
•       •       •

1096 clicks; posted to Politics » on 26 Jul 2012 at 8:03 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



48 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-07-26 03:50:02 PM
if Scumlia is reading this: fark YOU.
 
2012-07-26 04:28:50 PM
encrypted-tbn1.google.com
 
2012-07-26 04:28:58 PM
Does Stormfront know you're using them as a legal reference?
 
2012-07-26 04:29:15 PM
Somebody ask him if we can have the Fourth Amendment back.
 
2012-07-26 04:29:21 PM
OMG! Secondary sources!
 
2012-07-26 04:53:21 PM

Nabb1: OMG! Secondary sources!


As long as its not European judicial history. He hates that source.
 
2012-07-26 04:54:20 PM
zombo.com
 
2012-07-26 04:55:51 PM

Marcus Aurelius: Somebody ask him if we can have the Fourth Amendment back.


Also the 1st, 5th and 8th.
 
2012-07-26 05:12:20 PM
Umm...where did the article go?
 
2012-07-26 05:15:29 PM
For Scalia I'm sure the list begins and ends at FoxNews.com
 
2012-07-26 05:18:19 PM

Diogenes: Nabb1: OMG! Secondary sources!

As long as its not European judicial history. He hates that source.


Hard to tell what he meant without an article, but cases have for years and years contained citations and references to such things for all sorts of purposes, but not exactly binding or persuasive authority. Judges quote a lot of different things. Mostly legal authority of course, but there are all sorts of citations to all sorts of other sources - newspapers, books, treatises both legal and non-legal, Black's Law Dictionary, William Shakespeare - almost anything ever put to paper. Nothing to get all worked up over.
 
2012-07-26 05:31:42 PM

Nabb1: Diogenes: Nabb1: OMG! Secondary sources!

As long as its not European judicial history. He hates that source.

Hard to tell what he meant without an article, but cases have for years and years contained citations and references to such things for all sorts of purposes, but not exactly binding or persuasive authority. Judges quote a lot of different things. Mostly legal authority of course, but there are all sorts of citations to all sorts of other sources - newspapers, books, treatises both legal and non-legal, Black's Law Dictionary, William Shakespeare - almost anything ever put to paper. Nothing to get all worked up over.


I have no issue with that at all. Merely pointing out the Scalia's position on secondary sources may seem selective and/or inconsistent.
 
2012-07-26 05:36:22 PM

Diogenes: Nabb1: Diogenes: Nabb1: OMG! Secondary sources!

As long as its not European judicial history. He hates that source.

Hard to tell what he meant without an article, but cases have for years and years contained citations and references to such things for all sorts of purposes, but not exactly binding or persuasive authority. Judges quote a lot of different things. Mostly legal authority of course, but there are all sorts of citations to all sorts of other sources - newspapers, books, treatises both legal and non-legal, Black's Law Dictionary, William Shakespeare - almost anything ever put to paper. Nothing to get all worked up over.

I have no issue with that at all. Merely pointing out the Scalia's position on secondary sources may seem selective and/or inconsistent.


I don't think he had an issue with the mere fact that it was being used, but how it was being used, IIRC. Been a while since I read that, too. In any case, judges can disagree on how any source is being relied upon for arguments.
 
2012-07-26 06:22:36 PM
Hmmm...the article begs a huge question:

What's Scalia's Fark handle?
 
2012-07-26 07:44:24 PM

gimmegimme: Hmmm...the article begs a huge question:

What's Scalia's Fark handle?


Oh, hey, what's going on in this thread? Anybody got some good broccoli-type comments? That went over really well with my.... friends. Yeah. Friends.
 
2012-07-26 07:52:49 PM

ib_thinkin: gimmegimme: Hmmm...the article begs a huge question:

What's Scalia's Fark handle?

Oh, hey, what's going on in this thread? Anybody got some good broccoli-type comments? That went over really well with my.... friends. Yeah. Friends.


Hey, ib_thinkin. I would LOVE if you could sneak "0bumber" and/or "Moochelle" into your next dissent.
 
2012-07-26 07:55:54 PM

gimmegimme: Hey, ib_thinkin. I would LOVE if you could sneak "0bumber" and/or "Moochelle" into your next dissent.


Don't know what you're talking about, but that's great stuff.

On a completely unrelated note, I think us regular folks out here on the interwebs should really keep an eye on Florida v. Jardines.
 
2012-07-26 08:03:40 PM

gimmegimme: Hmmm...the article begs a huge question:

What's Scalia's Fark handle?


I'm going with someone with a GED in law.
 
Slu
2012-07-26 08:15:17 PM
The link doesn't work on an iPad. Wtf?
 
2012-07-26 08:17:03 PM

Slu: The link doesn't work on an iPad. Wtf?


It doesn't work 'cause it ain't there no more.
 
2012-07-26 08:18:00 PM

Marcus Aurelius: Somebody ask him if we can have the Fourth Amendment back.


of course not. the entire world economy is based on the profits possible from the 'war on (some) drugs'

/cliffs: the black market profits of illegal drugs makes possible the slow creep of inflation owed b/c our currency is not constitutional and the country itself is forever indebted to the Federal Reserve; as Federal as Federal Express
//lh5.googleusercontent.com
///lh6.googleusercontent.com
//it's as simple as the difference between these two bills
/the real crash is coming next year
.lh6.googleusercontent.com
 
2012-07-26 08:30:11 PM

urban.derelict: Marcus Aurelius: Somebody ask him if we can have the Fourth Amendment back.

of course not. the entire world economy is based on the profits possible from the 'war on (some) drugs'

/cliffs: the black market profits of illegal drugs makes possible the slow creep of inflation owed b/c our currency is not constitutional and the country itself is forever indebted to the Federal Reserve; as Federal as Federal Express
//[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 640x279]
///[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 640x267]
//it's as simple as the difference between these two bills
/the real crash is coming next year
.[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 400x156]


Wow. That sucks. But on the upside, I have it on good authority that next year will also be the Year of the Linux Desktop.
 
2012-07-26 08:31:37 PM

Demetrius: For Scalia I'm sure the list begins and ends at http://FoxNews.com/

FreeRepublic.

/FTFY.
 
2012-07-26 08:32:45 PM
introvertsdilemma.com

Approves.

/...but misread headline as "pubic materials"
 
2012-07-26 08:33:41 PM
 
2012-07-26 09:11:42 PM
The only websites Thomas is visiting are his online banking to make sure the checks are clearing.
 
2012-07-26 09:13:21 PM

urban.derelict: Marcus Aurelius: Somebody ask him if we can have the Fourth Amendment back.

of course not. the entire world economy is based on the profits possible from the 'war on (some) drugs'

/cliffs: the black market profits of illegal drugs makes possible the slow creep of inflation owed b/c our currency is not constitutional and the country itself is forever indebted to the Federal Reserve; as Federal as Federal Express

lh6.googleusercontent.com


First of all, that picture is stupid and wrong because Jackson's visage is backed by the full faith and credit of the Government of the United State. But more to the point, in what way are precious metals a better backing for a currency than the government's word?

If you think gold and silver prices aren't subject to attempted manipulation just like paper money you're kidding yourself. But on top of that, taking away the ability of government to control the value of its currency is suicide in a modern economy: There's no way for it to moderate the business cycle, no way to control its competitiveness on international markets, and if worse comes to worse, there's nothing it can do to stop a deflationary death spiral.

Which is the whole reason FDR wanted off it in the first place...
 
2012-07-26 09:17:21 PM
It's true, sadly. There was an editorial written in the Omaha World Herald in 2001 that influenced the decision of Gore Vs. Bush.

And we have been suffering Hell of Earth because of that one loudmouth ever since.
 
2012-07-26 09:22:39 PM

Nabb1: Diogenes: Nabb1: OMG! Secondary sources!

As long as its not European judicial history. He hates that source.

Hard to tell what he meant without an article, but cases have for years and years contained citations and references to such things for all sorts of purposes, but not exactly binding or persuasive authority. Judges quote a lot of different things. Mostly legal authority of course, but there are all sorts of citations to all sorts of other sources - newspapers, books, treatises both legal and non-legal, Black's Law Dictionary, William Shakespeare - almost anything ever put to paper. Nothing to get all worked up over.


Was Scalia the one to use a campaign speech by Obama as a citation in the Arizona case? I could see using most of the stuff you wrote to help form a decision, but a politician's speach that was given AFTER the hearing and after the law was written. That's a little shady.
 
2012-07-26 09:31:58 PM

urban.derelict: dumb things


Read this and then get back to us if it's too hard to understand.
 
2012-07-26 09:32:57 PM

jso2897: urban.derelict: Marcus Aurelius: Somebody ask him if we can have the Fourth Amendment back.

of course not. the entire world economy is based on the profits possible from the 'war on (some) drugs'

/cliffs: the black market profits of illegal drugs makes possible the slow creep of inflation owed b/c our currency is not constitutional and the country itself is forever indebted to the Federal Reserve; as Federal as Federal Express
//[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 640x279]
///[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 640x267]
//it's as simple as the difference between these two bills
/the real crash is coming next year
.[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 400x156]

Wow. That sucks. But on the upside, I have it on good authority that next year will also be the Year of the Linux Desktop.


That's strange. I have it on good authority that the world will end in December, as predicted by the Mayans. Whose bullshiat should I believe?
 
2012-07-26 09:40:18 PM

Nabb1: Diogenes: Nabb1: OMG! Secondary sources!

As long as its not European judicial history. He hates that source.

Hard to tell what he meant without an article, but cases have for years and years contained citations and references to such things for all sorts of purposes, but not exactly binding or persuasive authority. Judges quote a lot of different things. Mostly legal authority of course, but there are all sorts of citations to all sorts of other sources - newspapers, books, treatises both legal and non-legal, Black's Law Dictionary, William Shakespeare - almost anything ever put to paper. Nothing to get all worked up over.


So they just make shiat up.

That's great when it supports my point of view. It's pretty terrible when it doesn't.
 
2012-07-26 09:43:39 PM

GAT_00: Marcus Aurelius: Somebody ask him if we can have the Fourth Amendment back.

Also the 1st, 5th and 8th.


I'd trade the 10th for them.
 
2012-07-26 09:53:56 PM
I used to think that the judges that made up the Supreme Court were well-respected, intelligent and the utmost moral.
Then Scalia got in.
It reminded me of how I felt when I learned that my mother wasn't a virgin.
 
2012-07-26 09:58:10 PM
Alex Jones has been vindicated.
 
2012-07-26 10:20:05 PM

gimmegimme: Hmmm...the article begs a huge question:

What's Scalia's Fark handle?


Phil Herup.
 
2012-07-26 10:54:49 PM
USA

www.progressivepuppy.com

"Get over it. It's so old now."
 
2012-07-26 11:10:14 PM

erik-k: First of all, that picture is stupid and wrong because Jackson's visage is backed by the full faith and credit of the Government of the United State. But more to the point, in what way are precious metals a better backing for a currency than the government's word?

If you think gold and silver prices aren't subject to attempted manipulation just like paper money you're kidding yourself. But on top of that, taking away the ability of government to control the value of its currency is suicide in a modern economy: There's no way for it to moderate the business cycle, no way to control its competitiveness on international markets, and if worse comes to worse, there's nothing it can do to stop a deflationary death spiral.

Which is the whole reason FDR wanted off it in the first place...


THIS

TADA
 
2012-07-27 01:06:48 AM

erik-k: urban.derelict: Marcus Aurelius: Somebody ask him if we can have the Fourth Amendment back.

of course not. the entire world economy is based on the profits possible from the 'war on (some) drugs'

/cliffs: the black market profits of illegal drugs makes possible the slow creep of inflation owed b/c our currency is not constitutional and the country itself is forever indebted to the Federal Reserve; as Federal as Federal Express

[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 640x267]

First of all, that picture is stupid and wrong because Jackson's visage is backed by the full faith and credit of the Government of the United State. But more to the point, in what way are precious metals a better backing for a currency than the government's word?

If you think gold and silver prices aren't subject to attempted manipulation just like paper money you're kidding yourself. But on top of that, taking away the ability of government to control the value of its currency is suicide in a modern economy: There's no way for it to moderate the business cycle, no way to control its competitiveness on international markets, and if worse comes to worse, there's nothing it can do to stop a deflationary death spiral.

Which is the whole reason FDR wanted off it in the first place...


I understood some of them words you typed there but I can't fit them on a bumper sticker so I have to disagree.
 
2012-07-27 01:43:23 AM

Endrick: erik-k: urban.derelict: Marcus Aurelius: Somebody ask him if we can have the Fourth Amendment back.

of course not. the entire world economy is based on the profits possible from the 'war on (some) drugs'

/cliffs: the black market profits of illegal drugs makes possible the slow creep of inflation owed b/c our currency is not constitutional and the country itself is forever indebted to the Federal Reserve; as Federal as Federal Express

[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 640x267]

First of all, that picture is stupid and wrong because Jackson's visage is backed by the full faith and credit of the Government of the United State. But more to the point, in what way are precious metals a better backing for a currency than the government's word?

If you think gold and silver prices aren't subject to attempted manipulation just like paper money you're kidding yourself. But on top of that, taking away the ability of government to control the value of its currency is suicide in a modern economy: There's no way for it to moderate the business cycle, no way to control its competitiveness on international markets, and if worse comes to worse, there's nothing it can do to stop a deflationary death spiral.

Which is the whole reason FDR wanted off it in the first place...

I understood some of them words you typed there but I can't fit them on a bumper sticker so I have to disagree.


You, my friend, are in luck! I have a few RON PAUL bumper stickers left over. They are the gold standard of car-related adhesives.
 
2012-07-27 03:17:46 AM
I'm sure both he and Justice Thomas puruse whatever is on the Koch brothers' coffee table when they sleep over.
 
2012-07-27 05:39:28 AM

zenobia: GAT_00: Marcus Aurelius: Somebody ask him if we can have the Fourth Amendment back.

Also the 1st, 5th and 8th.

I'd trade the 10th for them.


What a shiatty deal.
 
2012-07-27 06:51:20 AM
Roberts' reading materials? Old Power Pack comics, the ingredients of bottled water, and occasionally the wrinkles on Ginsberg's ass.
 
2012-07-27 08:00:34 AM

gimmegimme: jso2897: urban.derelict: Marcus Aurelius: Somebody ask him if we can have the Fourth Amendment back.

of course not. the entire world economy is based on the profits possible from the 'war on (some) drugs'

/cliffs: the black market profits of illegal drugs makes possible the slow creep of inflation owed b/c our currency is not constitutional and the country itself is forever indebted to the Federal Reserve; as Federal as Federal Express
//[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 640x279]
///[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 640x267]
//it's as simple as the difference between these two bills
/the real crash is coming next year
.[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 400x156]

Wow. That sucks. But on the upside, I have it on good authority that next year will also be the Year of the Linux Desktop.

That's strange. I have it on good authority that the world will end in December, as predicted by the Mayans. Whose bullshiat should I believe?


Well, at least I'm not charging anything for mine.
 
2012-07-27 08:42:52 AM

erik-k: urban.derelict: Marcus Aurelius: Somebody ask him if we can have the Fourth Amendment back.

of course not. the entire world economy is based on the profits possible from the 'war on (some) drugs'

/cliffs: the black market profits of illegal drugs makes possible the slow creep of inflation owed b/c our currency is not constitutional and the country itself is forever indebted to the Federal Reserve; as Federal as Federal Express

[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 640x267]

First of all, that picture is stupid and wrong because Jackson's visage is backed by the full faith and credit of the Government of the United State. But more to the point, in what way are precious metals a better backing for a currency than the government's word?

If you think gold and silver prices aren't subject to attempted manipulation just like paper money you're kidding yourself. But on top of that, taking away the ability of government to control the value of its currency is suicide in a modern economy: There's no way for it to moderate the business cycle, no way to control its competitiveness on international markets, and if worse comes to worse, there's nothing it can do to stop a deflationary death spiral.

Which is the whole reason FDR wanted off it in the first place...


Besides, if we get away from fiat currency, all our precious metals will migrate to the place where they are worth the most fiat currency. Cause that's why we switched to fiat currency like 400 farking years ago.

Crazy people. Crazy people everywhere.
 
2012-07-27 09:47:27 AM

shotglasss: Roberts' reading materials? Old Power Pack comics, the ingredients of bottled water, and occasionally the wrinkles on Ginsberg's ass.


I have my problems with Roberts and Thomas - but compared to Alito and Scalia, the two men are towering monuments to judicial integrity.
 
2012-07-27 09:50:06 AM

BeesNuts: erik-k: urban.derelict: Marcus Aurelius: Somebody ask him if we can have the Fourth Amendment back.

of course not. the entire world economy is based on the profits possible from the 'war on (some) drugs'

/cliffs: the black market profits of illegal drugs makes possible the slow creep of inflation owed b/c our currency is not constitutional and the country itself is forever indebted to the Federal Reserve; as Federal as Federal Express

[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 640x267]

First of all, that picture is stupid and wrong because Jackson's visage is backed by the full faith and credit of the Government of the United State. But more to the point, in what way are precious metals a better backing for a currency than the government's word?

If you think gold and silver prices aren't subject to attempted manipulation just like paper money you're kidding yourself. But on top of that, taking away the ability of government to control the value of its currency is suicide in a modern economy: There's no way for it to moderate the business cycle, no way to control its competitiveness on international markets, and if worse comes to worse, there's nothing it can do to stop a deflationary death spiral.

Which is the whole reason FDR wanted off it in the first place...

Besides, if we get away from fiat currency, all our precious metals will migrate to the place where they are worth the most fiat currency. Cause that's why we switched to fiat currency like 400 farking years ago.

Crazy people. Crazy people everywhere.


Fool! Your paper money is WORTHLESS! Unlike my gold, which has REAL VALUE.
Now - can I trade you some of my valuable gold for some of your worthless paper money?

Sincerely yours, Benn Gleck.
 
2012-07-27 09:55:33 AM

jso2897: shotglasss: Roberts' reading materials? Old Power Pack comics, the ingredients of bottled water, and occasionally the wrinkles on Ginsberg's ass.

I have my problems with Roberts and Thomas - but compared to Alito and Scalia, the two men are towering monuments to judicial integrity.


I know the knock on Scalia. What's your issue(s) with Alito?
 
Displayed 48 of 48 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report