Antonin Scalia in The New York Times

On Civil Rights: Showy profundities on gay marriage are profoundly incoherent

In dissent [in the Supreme Court ruling which legalizes gay marriage nationwide], Justice Antonin Scalia mocked the soaring language of Justice Kennedy, who has become the nation's most important judicial champion of gay rights: "The opinion is couched in a style that is as pretentious as its content is egotistic," Justice Scalia wrote of his colleague's work. "Of course the opinion's showy profundities are often profoundly incoherent."

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the majority, "No longer may this liberty be denied. No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice and family. In forming a marital union, two people become something greater than once they were."

Source: N.Y. Times on 2015 SCOTUS decision on Obergefell v. Hodges Jun 27, 2015

On Civil Rights: Everyone in history, until 15 years ago, understood marriage

[Justice Kennedy wrote in legalizing gay marriage], "The generations that wrote and ratified the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment did not presume to know the extent of freedom in all of its dimensions, and so they entrusted to future generations a charter protecting the right of all persons to enjoy liberty as we learn its meaning."

This drew a withering response from Justice Scalia, a proponent of reading the original understanding of Constitution. His dissent was joined by Justice Thomas. marriage to one man and one woman is contrary to reason; they know that an institution as old as government itself, and accepted by every nation in history until 15 years ago, cannot possibly be supported by anything other than ignorance or bigotry."

Source: N.Y. Times on 2015 SCOTUS decision on Obergefell v. Hodges Jun 27, 2015

On Health Care: We should start calling ObamaCare "SCOTUS-care"

[In the King v. Burwell case on ObamaCare], Justice Scalia called the majority's reasoning "quite absurd" [in ruling that healthcare exchanges established by the state were constitutional]. "The court's decision reflects the philosophy that judges should endure whatever interpretive distortions it takes in order to correct a supposed flaw in the statutory machinery," he wrote.

"It is up to Congress to design its laws with care," he added, "and it is up to the people to hold them to account if they fail to carry out that responsibility."

Justice Scalia announced his dissent from the bench, a sign of bitter disagreement. His summary was laced with notes of incredulity and sarcasm, which sometimes drawing amused murmurs in the courtroom as he described the "interpretive somersaults" he said the majority had performed to reach the decision. "We really should start calling this law SCOTUS-care," Justice Scalia said, to laughter from the audience.

Source: N.Y. Times on 2015 SCOTUS decision on Obergefell v. Hodges Jun 26, 2015

The above quotations are from Media coverage of political races in The New York Times. Click here for other excerpts from Media coverage of political races in The New York Times. Click here for other excerpts by Antonin Scalia. Click here for a profile of Antonin Scalia.
Please consider a donation to OnTheIssues.org! Click for details -- or send donations to: 1770 Mass Ave. #630, Cambridge MA 02140 E-mail: submit@OnTheIssues.org (We rely on your support!)

Page last updated: May 20, 2019