Can you imagine a SC full of Scalias ruling from the bench for another 40 years?
:puke:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/02/politics/02SCAL.html?hpIn Re Scalia the Outspoken v. Scalia the Reserved
By ADAM LIPTAK
Published: May 2, 2004
PHILADELPHIA, April 29 — About 20 minutes into stock remarks in praise of the Constitution, Justice Antonin Scalia paused. "Everything I've said up to now," he told a hotel ballroom full of lawyers here on Thursday, "has been uncontroversial."
What followed was not.
In emphatic phrases punctuated by operatic gesticulation, he then launched into an attack on a series of the most important Supreme Court decisions of the last 40 years. The court was wrong, he said, to say the Constitution requires that lawyers be provided to poor people accused of crimes. It was wrong, too, to find that the First Amendment imposes limits on libel lawsuits.
"We have now determined," he continued, "that liberties exist under the federal Constitution — the right to abortion, the right to homosexual sodomy — which were so little rooted in the traditions of the American people that they were criminal for 200 years."