Friday, March 19, 2004

Methinks Fat Tony doth protest too much...

In his decision, Scalia took issue with critics who would assume he could not rule impartially simply because Cheney accepted his invitation to hunt ducks and he accepted Cheney's invitation to fly to Louisiana on a government jet.

"If it is reasonable to think that a Supreme Court Justice can be bought so cheap, the Nation is in deeper trouble than I had imagined," he wrote in the 21-page memorandum.

Scalia is right on this one, actually. By the previously established standards of the Supreme Court, he shouldn't be recusing himself from the case. But when he writes choice tidbits like this (from the full text):

"Nothing this Court says on those subjects will have any bearing upon the reputation and integrity of Richard Cheney."

it displays a willful naivete to the controversy surrounding the case. And willful naivete is not a quality we should be cultivating in Supreme Court justices.

Unless of course he means that it's slam dunk the Supremes will rule in Cheney's favor, in which case yes, nothing they say will have any bearing on his reputation...

Scalia does try to cover his ass a couple of paragraphs later:

"To be sure, there could be political consequences from disclosure of the fact (if it be so) that the Vice President favored business interests, and especially a sector of business with which he was formerly connected."

Ri-i-i-i-ight. So there could be political consequences if (well, when really, unless you think they're blocking the release of the documents just on point of principle, and not because they actually say something damaging) his rampant biases are exposed to the world, but that won't affect the perception of Cheney's integrity and reputation. What an interesting theory.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?