Thursday, April 14, 2005

Welcome to New York, Mr. Scalia



In asking about Scalia's dissent in Lawrence v. Texas and his view that privacy is not constitutionally protected, Eric Berndt, a law student, shocked the crowd by asking, "Do you sodomize your wife?"
[Source]


Seems like a fair question to me. I don't have a fancy law degree, but my understanding of Scalia's dissent[1] was that allowing consenting adults to commit unnatural acts in the privacy of their own homes would lead to widespread aberrant sexual behavior (and by aberrant, I mean "gay"). And since that allowed the government to intrude into the bedrooms of citizens, I think he should throw open wide the French doors to his boudoir.

But, all seriousness aside, Scalia proved to have an excellent sense of humor, as noted in the article:

"The constitution is not a living organism," Scalia said, espousing his belief that the Constitution's interpretation should not change over time. "It's a legal document."
Ibid


Man, what a kidder! If you'll excuse me, I have to find where in the Constitution it says that the Supreme Court decides elections.

[1]
State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity are likewise sustainable only in light of Bowers' validation of laws based on moral choices. Every single one of these laws is called into question by today's decision; the Court makes no effort to cabin the scope of its decision to exclude them from its holding. See ante, at 11 (noting "an emerging awareness that liberty gives substantial protection to adult persons in deciding how to conduct their private lives in matters pertaining to sex" (emphasis added)). The impossibility of distinguishing homosexuality from other traditional "morals" offenses is precisely why Bowers rejected the rational-basis challenge. "The law," it said, "is constantly based on notions of morality, and if all laws representing essentially moral choices are to be invalidated under the Due Process Clause, the courts will be very busy indeed." 478 U. S., at 196.2 Source


Admit it: you've always wanted to know if Antonin and the Mrs. get freaky.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home