Short thought here but I was listenting to Scalia last night railing on the bench:
JUSTICE SCALIA: Mr. Kneedler, what happened to the Eighth Amendment? You really want us to go through these 2,700 pages?
(Laughter.)
JUSTICE SCALIA: And do you really expect the Court to do that? Or do you expect us to -- to give this function to our law clerks?
Is this not totally unrealistic? That we are going to go through this enormous bill item by item and decide each one?
The 8th amendment is the constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. The bill's length and complexity were a major GOP talking point in 2010.
http://www.politico.com/...
I thought it was sort of sad that one of the members of the Supreme Court, who are allegedly appointed because of their ability to meticulously consider all the issues and who is paid big bucks inferred that it was below him to actually read the whole health care law?
I mean when the Tea Party first raised a ruckus about the ACA one of their talking points to their opponents was "have you read the law" and they carried copies of it. They derided the congress for passing something they didn't allegedly read.
Now they are championing Scalia one of elite high judges who is supposed to be the end arbiter of legal matters in the US for saying he won't read the law?
I would have thought that as prep for even hearing the case the Justices would have read the whole law? How can they even rule on it if they don't read it?
There is a very anti science anti intellectual element in the Republican Party that tends to favor emotion over reason or the facts. It's sort of sad to see that it even extends to their Supreme Court appointees.