Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has died

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 382 posts

Re: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has died

#181

Post by dang »

jdminhbg wrote: post #63
dang wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are far fewer outright political stories than there used to be. Probably fewer than ever, in fact. So if discussion quality is being dragged down, something else is dragging it. As for this post, experience has taught us that when a story crosses a certain magnitude, there's no stopping it from getting discussed on HN, so we may as well have a single thread.

> There are far fewer outright political stories than there used to be. Probably fewer than ever, in fact. I find that really difficult to believe, but you'd have access to stats and I don't. Maybe just confirmation bias on my part, or maybe disagreement on what's "outright political." > As for this post, experience has taught us that when a story crosses a certain magnitude, there's no stopping it from getting discu…

I gave you a curt reply above, so let me make up for that by thanking you for caring about the quality of HN. That's what matters most. It sounds like we largely agree anyhow. This thread is the rare case of being too big a story for normal moderation.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has died

#182

Post by fnordfnordfnord »

CWuestefeld wrote: post #157
tptacek wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't follow. It doesn't matter how much Obama wants to replace Scalia (I'm sure: a lot ). He can't. The Senate must consent to his nomination, and is entitled to advise it. And advise it they have: they've decided it should be an issue for the election this year, and the voters should decide.

Which is really a shame. With the entire lot of candidates on both sides ranging from bad to awful, it seems likely to me that this will be one of, if not the , deciding issue in the election. That's bad, because it will perpetuate party politics. No matter how much people dislike the candidate nominated by their party, they'll think they've got no recourse but to vote for him/her lest they lose the Court. All the Re…

It was always going to be, now it's just become apparent to those who don't pay attention. Next POTUS will nominate a replacement for Notorious RBG as well. This is probably the most important Presidential election in a long time.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has died

#183

Post by pvg »

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #180
tptacek wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's the Senate Majority Leader and the official spokesperson for Republicans in the Senate. The fact that he said it right away , after two GOP Senators who are also viable Presidential candidates said it as well, is a pretty strong indication of what's going to happen.

Point of Inquiry, Is there a parliamentarian in the house? There may be one or more ways to force McConnell's hand.

The president can use a recess appointment. It would probably end up looking worse than blocking a nomination for 11 months so it seems unlikely, if technically possible.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has died

#184

Post by rbanffy »

wildmusings wrote: post #170
dalke wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on your standard and which recount you look at. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_election_recount#Post-... : > under the strictest standard, where only a cleanly punched ballot with a fully removed chad was counted, Gore won by three votes.[38] Under all other standards, Bush won, with Bush's margin increasing as looser standards were used. ... because of the possibility of mistakes, it is difficult…

Very interesting. My own thoughts on this are that we should not be trying to determine intent on improperly filled ballots. In the same way that I'm responsible for getting myself to the voting booth, I am responsible for filling out my ballot properly. If I fail at that, my vote won't be registered. Where ballots aren't sufficiently clear to voters, they should be made so.

The parent mentioned that, although the ballots were not properly filled, intent was clear.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has died

#185

Post by orbitur »

dang wrote: post #159
orbitur wrote: post #43

He didn't actually say that, and I'm not sure how it spread. However, he's still a terrible person, and here's the quote yours spawned from: “There is no basis in text, tradition, or even in contemporary practice (if that were enough), for finding in the Constitution a right to demand judicial consideration of newly discovered evidence of innocence brought forward after conviction.” edit: This was originally in reply…

> he's still a terrible person The combination of incivility and internet buzzphrase is toxic for HN. Please don't do this when commenting here, regardless of how you feel about someone. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11096095 and marked it off-topic.

I admit the phrase "terrible person" is uncivil, but where is an internet buzzphrase in my comment?

Re: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has died

#186

Post by sandworm101 »

nemo wrote: post #28
rrggrr wrote: post #25

Scalia was foremost an advocate of judicial restraint, who believed that the further the Courts stretched interpreting law, the more vulnerable the Courts become to the animosities of the Executive and Legislative branches. The Judiciary, Scalia understood, was the least powerful and most vulnerable of the three branches of government, and its strength and influence rests in its artful and judicious use of its very,…

>Scalia was foremost an advocate of judicial restraint When convenient.

>>> When convenient.

I'd say more "when useful". Many of his opinions were too convoluted to be considered convenient. He often went on and on without saying much of anything.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has died

#187

Post by komaromy »

mikeyouse wrote: post #100
smt88 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To my knowledge, the precedent is to replace "whoever left the bench" with "whoever is likely to agree with the current President's party". Are there any examples where a liberal president nominated a conservative or vice-versa? (I'm not talking about situations where someone was appointed as a conservative and moved gradually left, which actually happens to all justices.)

A liberal would never elect a conservative and vice versa, but there's an expectation to maintain the court's approximate balance (which is why Scalia's death is such a big deal). So if a very right-leaning justice stepped down under a liberal president, he'd elect a center / center-left justice. If the most left-wing justice in the world stepped down, then a left-wing president could elect the most left-leaning pers…

Can you provide an example of when this has happened?

Re: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has died

#188

Post by ErikVandeWater »

sandworm101 wrote: post #175
ianamartin wrote: post #133

I usually disagreed with Scalia, but I have tons of respect for the man. He's always struck me as one of the best examples of the idea that two intelligent, educated people with reasonable minds may legitimately come to different conclusions about the same set of facts. I also found when reading transcripts of oral arguments that Scalia was really terrifically funny pretty often. Once, I was doing some computer repai…

>>> I usually disagreed with Scalia, but I have tons of respect for the man. He's always struck me as one of the best examples of the idea that two intelligent, educated people with reasonable minds may legitimately come to different conclusions about the same set of facts. I didn't have much respect for the man or the justice. As a justice, his interpretations were always based on a selectively warped view of histor…

I won't comment as to Scalia's version of history, but I will provide more context for the "sow's ear" comment:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/12/us/12bar.html?_r=0

This comment referred specifically to getting a clerkship, and he also admits one of his favorite clerks went to Ohio State.

In general it seems, he had a lot of bark, but no real malice, otherwise why would he be good friends with other justices, including of all people Breyer and Ginsburg?

Re: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has died

#189

Post by Beltiras »

lotharbot wrote: post #128
fennecfoxen wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, consider: You're a Senate Republican. Obama nominates a guy who is certainly no Scalia but legitimately isn't the worst . You can hold out and hope that a Republican gets elected, but there's a good chance that'll be Donald Trump, and what kind of a judge is that weirdo going to nominate? You hate that guy and think he's a blemish to the name of the Republican party. Also, there's still a real risk Hilary/Sande…

> "there's a good chance that'll be Donald Trump" it's actually pretty unlikely. Fivethirtyeight has a bunch of good articles about this, but the simplest piece of information pointing to it: Trump is intensely disliked by about 60% of the voting public. He's got a vocal and enthusiastic following, but once you go outside that bubble, he simply doesn't have room to grow. I voted for Bush twice, McCain, and Romney, an…

Which Republican candidate would you vote for rather than Hillary/Bernie?

Re: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has died

#190

Post by Beltiras »

ethbro wrote: post #97
vonnik wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally agree. The stay he supported on the Florida recount was rampant federal interference in a state matter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_v._Gore#Stay_of_the_Flori... Indirectly, he gave us eight years of incompetence and Iraq, a horrible farce of a war.

You can't possibly put the result of Bush being elected on a Supreme Court Justice. Any more than you can put it on a single person who voted for him. Yes, they all share some responsibility, but the amount is so miniscule given future actions and how many people were fooled and lied to so as to be almost completely disconnected.

Actually one can. Just like the cause of a hanged man's death is the knot the hangman tied. There's a great big sequence of events preceding it for sure.
Post reply on HN