Obama's least favorite supreme court justices - Clarence Thomas, Scalia

[wacki]

Check this video of him cutting himself off when calling Clarence Thomas "not experienced ... err strong enough".

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/08/16/nuance-obama-almost-says-clarence-thomas-didnt-have-enough-experience-to-serve/

[seeker_two]

How long has Thomas been on SCOTUS?....and the libs are still lobbing grenades at him?......

Let it go, people.... 

[MicroBalrog]

I share Obama's dislike of Scalia.

[Manedwolf]

I share Obama's dislike of Scalia.

You'd rather Heller have gone 4-5?

[MicroBalrog]

I share Obama's dislike of Scalia.

You'd rather Heller have gone 4-5?

I'd rather Heller would have been written by a guy like Thomas. Also, Raich could have at least gone 4-5.

Let us remember that Scalia voted to rip the medicine from the hands of a dying cancer patient, AND step on the Constitution in one convenient package.

[roo_ster]

Scalia has been the second-most consistent voice for the COTUS on the SCOTUS.

Thomas, of course, is Top Constitutional Dawg on the SCOTUS.

I'd love to have nine Clarence Clones on the SCOTUS, but that is not within the realm of the possible.

[MicroBalrog]

Scalia has star status because of his undeniable writing skill. That's why he's the symbol of the conservative legal movement.

But it has to be remembered that he voted to trample the constitution and rip the medicine out of the hands of a dying cancer patient.

[Ezekiel]

I'd love to have nine Clarence Clones on the SCOTUS...

Yeah.  I'd love a bunch of misogynist fools trapped in the "literal legality box."

Thank God that brand of radicalism is impossible.

With any luck, we get a more liberal majority over he next eight years.

[MicroBalrog]

With any luck, we get a more liberal majority over he next eight years.

The kind of guys who also voted to rip the medicine from a dying cancer patient's hands? No thanks.

[wacki]

But it has to be remembered that he voted to trample the constitution and rip the medicine out of the hands of a dying cancer patient.

Explain plz

[MicroBalrog]

But it has to be remembered that he voted to trample the constitution and rip the medicine out of the hands of a dying cancer patient.

Explain plz

Gonzales v. Raich.

The majority held that the interstate commerce clause could be interpreted to read that in the case where a cancer patient that needed marijuana for medical purposes, grew the marijuana herself, and  used it, without the weed ever traveling in interstate commerce, the clause still applied.

Scalia voted with the majority.

My personal opinion on the case is to agree with Justice Thomas, who wrote:

If the Federal Government can regulate growing a half-dozen cannabis plants for personal consumption (not because it is interstate commerce, but because it is inextricably bound up with interstate commerce), then Congress Article I powersas expanded by the Necessary and Proper Clausehave no meaningful limits.

[MechAg94]

With any luck, we get a more liberal majority over he next eight years.

The kind of guys who also voted to rip the medicine from a dying cancer patient's hands? No thanks.

I was thinking more along the lines of judges who would erase the 2nd amendment and say there was no right to bear arms. 

To me the problem is judges who have preconceived ideas of what is "right" and make the law/interpretation fit their personal views, similar to what happens in a lot of death penalty cases.  That goes for all of them.