Cross posted from The Horse You Rode In On
Under the Wahhabi Islamists who hold sway in Saudi Arabia, the Koran doubles as the Saudi constitution and Sharia is its law – stoning for adultery, beheading of witches, lesser penalties or none for wife beating and rape.
The judges – all Muslim clerics – believe their own interpretations represent the will of God.
Sound like anyone we know? (hint: he wears a robe.)
On the U.S. Supreme Court, the loudest of the Wahhabi Wook-Awikes uses his own peculiar construction of the U.S. Constitution as his Koran and believes his interpretations represent the will of the framers – except, of course, when he has to turn activist (Shazaam/Boom) to stop the recount in a presidential election so that the losing Republican can be installed in the White House (Mecca must be kept free of infidels).
But let’s not take facetious liberties with anointed literalists. Though Scalia, like Islamic fundamentalists, wants us all to return to a past that never existed – free of gays (like Iran?), free of uppity minorities, free of people named Ruth Bader Ginsburg – in truth, there is a difference between Sharia and Scalia. The Saudis are actually trying to reform their court system.
They’re reducing the power of their own right-wing justices – the Judiciary Council, which is packed with the most extreme reactionaries in the whole reactionary kingdom.
Those guys will be reassigned to administrative work, and a new Supreme Court will be appointed. Who might turn up on that body remains to be seen, but we’d be happy to help. We have four or five Wahhabi Wook-Awikes we’d love to trade, say, for a low draft choice or a barrel of oil apiece.