Sunday, March 26, 2006

Scalia e' pazzo

Get this: During their confirmation hearings, nominees like Alito dared not speak about their opinions on matters "that may come before the court." (What the hell other matters would we be interested in, anyway? Who you like in the second race at Pimlico?) Yet here we have Antonin "the Fixer" Scalia holding forth on the fate of Gitmo detainees--an issue the court is wrestling with right now--a mere two weeks ago. Worse yet, he appears to have made his decision already, without having heard a single argument. How in heaven's name did we ever allow a fascist thug like Nino on this country's highest court? And how can we allow him to hear arguments on this case given his confessed pre-judgment of the outcome? If he doesn't recuse himself, he has no integrity left whatsoever. But we already knew that.

Should Scalia Recuse Himself From Gitmo Case? - Newsweek Periscope -
April 3, 2006 issue - The Supreme Court this week will hear arguments in a big case: whether to allow the Bush administration to try Guantánamo detainees in special military tribunals with limited rights for the accused. But Justice Antonin Scalia has already spoken his mind about some of the issues in the matter. During an unpublicized March 8 talk at the University of Freiburg in Switzerland, Scalia dismissed the idea that the detainees have rights under the U.S. Constitution or international conventions, adding he was "astounded" at the "hypocritical" reaction in Europe to Gitmo. "War is war, and it has never been the case that when you captured a combatant you have to give them a jury trial in your civil courts," he says on a tape of the talk reviewed by NEWSWEEK. "Give me a break." Challenged by one audience member about whether the Gitmo detainees don't have protections under the Geneva or human-rights conventions, Scalia shot back: "If he was captured by my army on a battlefield, that is where he belongs. I had a son on that battlefield and they were shooting at my son and I'm not about to give this man who was captured in a war a full jury trial. I mean it's crazy." Scalia was apparently referring to his son Matthew, who served with the U.S. Army in Iraq. Scalia did say, though, that he was concerned "there may be no end to this war."
Technorati Tags: , , , , ,