RIP Scalia

Holy crap. Didn't see this coming. Did anybody?

This changes everything. There's so many people with a stake in how the SCOTUS is formed.

I wonder if he felt ill at all before this on other days? He may have been ignoring something in order to go to the end of Obama's term.

Heard by text from a buddy. I assume any case open could deadlock 4-4 and nothing happens.

RIP indeed, best justice of our time. Never strayed for public opinion, held the original meaning of law as a judge should.

As if our times were not interesting enough already.

Like his votes or not, Scalia was a very intelligent, well-spoken, and interesting guy. When I lived in Baltimore I sometimes took a sick day to go to DC would would often sit in on the Supreme Court for the morning. As I recall, Scalia was always the most engaged and vociferous judge. I like that. He really seemed to enjoy his job and went beyond the call of duty in challenging whoever stood before him.

Quote: Wizard

Like his votes or not, Scalia was a very intelligent, well-spoken, and interesting guy. When I lived in Baltimore I sometimes took a sick day to go to DC would would often sit in on the Supreme Court for the morning. As I recall, Scalia was always the most engaged and vociferous judge. I like that. He really seemed to enjoy his job and went beyond the call of duty in challenging whoever stood before him.

I'd really like to sit in on a session one day, what was the process? I assume get there at the crack of dawn and wait?

Obama is the first Democratic President since FDR and Truman to get to appoint a 3rd justice. And all three were appointed by Republican presidents.

David Souter 1990–2009 (18–19 years) Bush, G. H. W.
John Paul Stevens 1975–2010 (34–35 years) Ford
Antonin Scalia 1986–2016 (29–30 years) Reagan

With Obama's 3rd nomination and Clinton's 2nd nomination the Republican candidates mostly called for the Senate to block any nomination this year.

Quote: AZDuffman

I'd really like to sit in on a session one day, what was the process? I assume get there at the crack of dawn and wait?

The court sets aside a number of seats, like 12, to view the morning session. You line up on the south side of the building. Get there early, as they have a limited number of spots. I think they let people in at 9:30, so get a place in line by 8:30 at least. Do not be confused with another line that lets you listen in for about five minutes only. It really is worth it to listen in on a whole case. I think they sometimes take in another case after lunch, but I'm not sure. If they do, they let in a new bunch of viewers. I've always done this in the morning. If you have the choice, do not go when they are doing a really big case, as the line may form several hours before.

Keep in mind I last did this about 20 years ago, so procedures may have changed.

Quote: AZDuffman

Heard by text from a buddy. I assume any case open could deadlock 4-4 and nothing happens.

On CNN earlier, a Fed judge said any tie
is a win for the side filing the suit.

Scalia disappointed me several years ago when he was interviewed by Lesley Stahl, although I can see by looking at the transcript it also was a case of the Media putting a spin on what he actually said [see link].

In any case in defending their decision in Bush vs. Gore, Scalia was defensive at one point, allowing footage that went around of him saying "get over it. It's so old by now"

I felt he should have said instead, don't you remember what was going on? It was getting on into December and we didn't know who was going to be President. People were legitimately wondering if this was going to be going on for months! Florida's idea of how to decide the winner? Forget it!

He did defend it better than I thought, reading the whole thing now.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/justice-scalia-on-the-record/

Quote: Evenbob

On CNN earlier, a Fed judge said any tie
is a win for the side filing the suit.

I think the opposite would be true. Every commentary I heard said a 4-4 vote would pretty much be the same thing as a 0-9 vote against whatever was before the court. It takes five votes to overturn a lower court ruling.