Discussion: Hans Von Spakovsky: 'Obligation' To Count Scalia's Vote In Pending Cases

system1 · February 24, 2016, 5:36pm

Discussion for article #246417

humpback · February 24, 2016, 5:49pm

Well, why don’t you just in his place, Hans.

alliebean · February 24, 2016, 5:50pm

Just. No.

Shaking head

There comes a point when there is just nothing left to say.

austin_dave · February 24, 2016, 5:51pm

I want to count all the votes of all the dead people in all elections.

publishermike · February 24, 2016, 5:52pm

Someone find out his position on those who cast absentee ballots and then die before election day.

Case closed.

austin_dave · February 24, 2016, 5:53pm

This will gain traction. How badly does Roberts want to preserve his legacy?

inlabsitrust · February 24, 2016, 5:53pm

Uhh. No, Hans. Not the way it works. Justices sometimes are persuaded by the force of their colleagues’ arguments to switch their preliminary votes. Roberts may have even done this in his Obamacare vote. The horse is not out of the barn until the final vote.

But then Hans, you do represent the Heritage Foundation. So I am sure you approve of all those dead people from Chicago who have allegedly voted in past elections, and you’d never whine about such a practice.

ealleniii · February 24, 2016, 5:54pm

Mr. Scalia had already contributed to the outcome of these cases. He asked questions during oral arguments, and his clerks have written position papers. He can not, however, sign his name to an opinion from beyond the grave. Even if possible, the constitution clearly says his term ends with death.

riverstreet · February 24, 2016, 5:54pm

You know what else is an obligation, as written in the Constitution?

ottnott · February 24, 2016, 5:54pm

Just see if you can get a majority vote in the Supreme Court for that, Hans.

tena · February 24, 2016, 5:54pm

As if anyone from the Bush Justice Dept. knows what the hell the law is about. Puhleeeeeeeze.

I do not recall a hearsay exception for dead justices where cases have been “decided.” Granted this isn’t testimony but it might as well be.

ralph_vonholst · February 24, 2016, 5:55pm

Mr. Von Spakovsky has agreed to provide a medium and a ouija board.

austin_dave · February 24, 2016, 5:56pm

Hey we could hold a seance or ask Haley Joel Osment.
http://astropt.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/i-see-dead-people.jpg

austin_dave · February 24, 2016, 5:57pm

I thinking Mr. Spakovsky is from Bridgeport, Chicago, oh, around 1960.

ctvoter · February 24, 2016, 5:57pm

Isn’t there some sort of provision that requires the final votes to be cast by living human beings?

Jesus. Talk about planned “voter fraud”. I guess Scalia can, according to Hans, vote early and often.

sysprog · February 24, 2016, 5:57pm

Ummmm…is this another one of those ‘traditions’ that never happened but BY GOD, should have? Except only when there is a RW Justice and a Democratic President? Got it.

jcblues · February 24, 2016, 5:57pm

hey Hans… what if just before he passed his life passed before his eyes and he suddenly realized he’d been completely wrong about everything in his life and wanted to change his vote…

do we need to get a pottery wheel and stand around it while we wait for his ghost like Patrick Swayze and get his ‘final’ opinion?

jonney_5 · February 24, 2016, 5:58pm

consistency is not valued if being consistent is not convenient in Republican party circles…

Scalia was a fine example of this himself…

roberta · February 24, 2016, 5:58pm

“All in favor of this (conservative) position, do nothing and that will count as a yes vote. Justice Scalia? Ahhh. Justice Scalia votes a yes.”

ctvoter · February 24, 2016, 5:58pm

We shall see, won’t we?