Justice Scalias EXCELLENT Dissenting Opinion Specifies 37 LIES from the US Supreme Court
Opinion| Survey: Lies or Opinions?| Justice Ginzberg's Background| Syllabus| UVa Speech| Biography| Ginzberg & Gays| Picture| VMI Forum| Dissenting Opinion| Excerpts from Dissenting Opinion| Guestbook| Phyllis Schaffley on VMI
The following excerpts from Justice Antonin Scalia's opinion illustrate how far off the
deep end Justice Ginzbergs opinion really is. Can you see the
distinction between what Justice Scalia considers to beopinions and what he
considers to be lies?
1) We have no established criterion for intermediate scrutiny either, but essentially apply it when it seems like a good idea to load the dice
2) the assertion that either tradition has been unconstitutional through the centuries is not law, but politics smuggled into law.
3) reversion to single sex education is prohibited nationwide, not by democratic processes but by order of this Court.
4) This is not the interpretation of a Constitution, but the creation of one
5) The Government [stated] unequivocally that the appropriate standard in this case is `intermediate scrutiny, but for VMI only this Court used strict scrutiny [as] the correct constitutional standard for evaluating classifications that deny opportunities to individuals based on their sex
6) Only the amorphous "exceedingly persuasive justification" phrase,
and not the standard elaboration of intermediate scrutiny, can be made to yield this
7) the statements are misleading and the statements are irresponsible
8) The Court's intimations are particularly out of place
9) It is hard to consider women a "discrete and insular minorit[y]" unable to employ the "political processes ordinarily to be relied upon," when they constitute a majority of the electorate
10) single gender education at the college level is beneficial to both sexes is a fact established in this case and that fact was overwhelming--indeed, virtually uncontradicted in the words of the court that received the evidence re: Ginzbergs false statement.
11) There can be no serious dispute
12) it relies on a series of contentions that are irrelevant or erroneous as a matter of law
13) the Court's most fundamental error
14) is without antecedent in our sex discrimination cases and by itself discredits the Court's decision
15) utterly refute the claim that VMI has elected to maintain its all male student body composition for some misogynistic reason
16) That is wrong on numerous grounds
17) This is an unheard of doctrine
18) It is, moreover, not true
19) the plain fact, which the Court does not deny, is that it was
20) If it were impossible for individual human beings (or groups of human beings) to act autonomously in effective pursuit of a common goal, the game of soccer would not exist
21) How remarkable to criticize the District Court on the ground that its findings rest on the evidence
22) has rendered the trial a sham
23) This is law making by indirection
24) that mission is not great enough to accommodate women."
25) the Court would certainly be on the losing side
26) The point ... is a strawman; no one has made any such claim
27) is simply false
28) is either false or else sets a standard much higher than VMI had to meet
29) is irrelevant
30) the Court simply declares, with no basis in the evidence
31) is rather like making crucial to the lawfulness of the United States Army record "evidence" that its purpose is to do battle
32) That is simply wrong
33) Any lawyer who gave that advice to the Commonwealth ought to have been either disbarred or committed
34) This is a great puzzlement.
35) Supreme Court of the United States does not sit to announce "unique" dispositions
36) that assurance assures nothing, unless it is to be taken as a promise that in the future the Court will disclaim the reasoning it has used today to destroy VMI
37) did not the Court today abandon the principles of law it has applied in our earlier sex classification cases? THE 24 LIES