Skip to main content

View Diary: Bachmann's Office DENIES Scalia Spoke to Tea Party Caucus (236 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Writing laws is prohibited (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    greeseyparrot, cc, eagle17765
    •  If you can demonstrate that Scalia was writing (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      VClib

      laws, perhaps you might want to bring up ethics charges against him.

      Look, I understand your dismay at Scalia talking to a group of Congress.  People like Jonathan Turley share your concern, but recognize that that Justices have done this in the past:

      Scalia is not the first justice to cultivate a constituency. Justice William Douglas, appointed by Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1939, publicly embraced environmental causes, including the preservation of the C&O Canal. More recently, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was criticized for condemning the death penalty. In a 2001 speech in Minnesota, O'Connor said that she questioned whether the death penalty could be "fairly administered in this country." She told her audience, "Minnesota doesn't have [the death penalty], and you must breathe a big sigh of relief every day."

      and he recognizes that other Justices also talk with partisan groups:

      This is not a problem only for the more conservative justices. While Justices John Roberts, Scalia, Thomas and Alito have all spoken to or been honored by the conservative Federalist Society, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has headlined for the liberal American Constitution Society, and Justice Stephen Breyer appears frequently before outside groups. In one speech at a foreign conference, Ginsburg assailed conservative members of Congress for statements that she said "fueled" an "irrational fringe" that threatened her life.

      I highly recommend that Turley link.  He complains about the same thing that bothers you, but he recongizes that it technically isn't prohibited (which is the point I tried to make).  He thinks that should change.  

      •  why do you post red herrings (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cc, TofG, eagle17765

        In your example:
        Justice embraced environmental causes, including the preservation of the C&O Canal. * Note: NO laws were written by the Justice.

        More recently, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was criticized for condemning the death penalty. * Note: NO laws were written by the Justice.

        In a 2001 speech in Minnesota, O'Connor said ... * Note: NO laws were written by the Justice and we have a copy of the speech.

        When Scalia, Roberts, Thomas do speeches for groups - they are NOT WRITING LAWS.

        When Breyer gave his speech - he was not writing laws & we have a copy of his speech.

        Not so in today's Closed Door Caucus meeting with Scalia and Bachmann

        Why no outline of Scalia's seminar made public?

        Why no copy of his speech to them made public?

        I seriously don't know if you really do not know the difference between a Justice making speeches to groups and helping a Caucus write laws in a Closed Door meeting that is so private - no copy of his outline or speech are made available.

        Look, if Scalia wants to meet with Bachmann on her dime & his dime - go for it.  But when they meet on MY DIME during hours that my tax dollars pay BOTH of them to be working and upholding the Constitution then I want a copy of every thing they say in that private cloaed door meeting.  I want to "verify" that he did not help her Caucus write laws and I think every American should demand proof of what he said today.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site