"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , Ed Huntress
says...

Yeah, that case went 5:4. It was a close one. If Scalia (or Bork) doesn't
find a right specifically written into the Constitution, they don't
believe
it exists. That is, unless the right would support a conservative issue.
Which makes the 10th Amendment nothing more than an antique curiosity.

Did you see the recent decision where *Scalia* authored the majority
opinion that strengthened the rights to jury trial? Basically the
courts were using information not presented to juries when considering
sentencing. Scalia of all the justices said that this amounts
to an infringement on the 6th amendment.

Nope, I didn't see that one. Scalia is not very predictable, except in one
regard: He never allows anything to get in the way of a decision he wants to
make. Bork has a disparaging, sneering name for that type of judge:
"Results-oriented."

Ed Huntress