Discussion for article #231147
So, since none of our treaties are specifically mentioned, are they all null and void? For all parties?
Yep. Nothing in there about anal rape or dismemberment. So we’re good, right?
What an asshole.
Scalia is absolutely right. The “cruel and unusual” refers to punishment, i.e. after being found guilty. The constitution says nothing about treatment before being found guilty. Voila! See how easy it is to wipe your ass with the constitution?
Nothing in the Constitution specifically prohibits torture—but the second paragraph of Article Six serves the purpose.
“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”
Since all of the Geneva Conventions and the UN Convention on Torture all expressly forbid torture in any form, and since all of those documents are treaties which the US signed and ratified in the Senate, Article Six makes those treaties the Supreme Law of the Land.
So it can be argued that the Constitution, in a roundabout way, does indeed prohibit the use of torture.
As usual, Scalia is working overtime to be dramatic and to call attention to himself as the only one who really know about the Constitution—when in reality, he’s just a fat putz.
Scalia just excised the 8th Amendment?
Or is it just a technicality here? It’s an Amendment, so it’s not in the original Constitution (and he’s an originalist!)
The 78-year-old justice says he doesn’t “think it’s so clear at all,” especially if interrogators were trying to find a ticking nuclear bomb.
Wtf is this? 24?
Scalia is just an incompetent justice. The 8th Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment clearly makes torture illegal. He shouldn’t just be removed from SCOTUS, the fool should be disbarred.
Nothing in the Constitution prevents a RWNJ from a life-time appointment?
“He [the President] shall have the Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur”
Seems pretty clear to me. We have entered in numerous treaties prohibiting torture, all completely in compliance with that statement…therefore we are bound by those treaties by the Constitution.
The Constitution is silent on slavery too.
Whether it’s in the Constitution is irrelevant. It’s against U.S. law, with up to 20 years imprisonment for each count. Torture resulting in death can potentially carry the death penalty.
Ol’ Torquemada risen from the 9th circle. Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch’entrate.
The constitution also doesn’t explicitly prohibit murder. That’s why we have laws.
what a SCROTUS.
Nope, we have an entire amendment, the 13th, banning slavery.
Yea that pesky Geneva Convention and there something in the Constitution about not using duress!
If anyone deserves to be tortured, it’s this son of a bitch.
This man has no morals whatsoever. He is a piss-poor excuse for a supposedly neutral arbitrator. He has already made up his mind about any case long before ruling on it. Were there any justice in this world, he would have been impeached and removed from office a long time ago. Once again, ANYONE who justifies torture has proven themselves to be a monster. Just because it’s not specifically prohibited by the Constitution does not make it right. I don’t recall any clauses in there relating to the legality of murder, either. “Constitutional scholar”? Don’t make me laugh.
scalia is a dark and evil man. religious zealots have no place on the supreme court.
something makes me think that fat tony goes to sleep with dreams and great regrets that he didn’t live during the crusades… just imagine the contributions he could have made.