Scalia might not seem like such of a big fat hypocrite, IF he had applied
the same reasoning to the Voting Rights Act that he did to DOMA and Prop. 8 -- that the Court shouldn't be involved in overturning democratically adopted legislation.
From the DOMA opinion:
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/06/scalia-doma-dissent.php
“We have no power to decide this case,” Scalia wrote. “And even if we did, we have no power under the Constitution to invalidate this democratically adopted legislation. The Court’s errors on both points spring forth from the same diseased root: an exalted conception of the role of this institution in America.”
“That is jaw-dropping. It is an assertion of judicial supremacy over the people’s Representatives in Congress and the Executive,” he wrote, adding that the framers of the Constitution created a judicial branch with limited power in order to “guard their right to self-rule against the black-robed supremacy that today’s majority finds so attractive.”
“As I have said, the real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by ‘bare … desire to harm’ couples in same-sex marriages.”
(Note: substitute here: "is that the VRA is motivated by the bare desire to harm minority voters who have proven unlikely to vote for Republicans."
= new reply since forum marked as read
