justice scalia had an interview with the california lawyer
and uh... during the interview he was asked about the fourteenth amendment so i want to
read you guys the question and i want to reach you you know the relevant part of his answer
'cause it was a very long answer
so the question was in nineteen sixty eight when the thirty eight sixty i'm sorry eighteen
sixty eight
uh... when the thirty-ninth congress was debating and ultimately proposing the fourteenth amendment
i don't think anybody would have thought that you cool protection applied to sex discrimination
or certainly not to sexual orientation so does that mean we've gone off in erin by applying
the fourteenth amendment to bow out
so sculley as answer was
yes yes cited tell you that but you know if indeed the current society has come to different
views that's fine
you don't need the constitution to reflect the wishes of the current society which i
agree with
uh... certainly the constitution does not require discrimination
on the basis of sex the only issue is whether it propagates it it doesn't nobody ever thought
that that's what it meant nobody ever voted for that if the current society wants to outlaw
discrimination by sex hey we have to use called legislatures and they enact things called
loss
ait i could see how at someone would agree with him right the constitution especially
the fourteenth amendment is so broad it doesn't specifically say anything
cell and but it's just something telling us that this is that what you're saying is there's
a specifically say
haiti should apply the only blacks that were to women of the latinos or whoever it was
bank for a reason brian so but his argument is back
you know that amendment doesn't apply to women at all not that's what i took away from yesterday
is that yes sir
and he says it doesn't apply to women at all
but that's ok because under our political system
people can vote on things so women don't get discriminated against right if they want to
or pecan if they want the court e q
school is lodging and this is absolutely case uh...
somewhat what about the equal protection clause does that mean anything at all that you can't
action clause doesn't specifically mention that's what he's talking about
at supporting means britain france the equal protection clause doesn't mention anyone specifically
was done in order to save right innocent you know the thirty forty to fifty amendments
were to free the slaves
and they were saying hey listen they get it because as everybody else's work there
another wrote a vaguely just as you say the equal protection of the laws of center
and school is saying that in a black people in maine
so it at alabama i'm just picking a random state
or california or anyone else was to say hey you know what will they don't have the same
bigoted basically i was sad day for you
uh... you know make fifty cents when i got make a buck as an example here's what my argument
to that is if they were specifically referring to black people then
dot like equal protection clause would say black people but he did say that because you
know the founding fathers right yet so you know as big as possible that's a great point
scalia would counter uh... by saying look ert at the time nobody thought that it apply
the woman he didn't apply to a man at the time
when they got the right to vote for example many years later many decades that day
it certainly didn't apply to sexual orientation made that didn't happen tho you know recently
as well you know
bigspy
so what i'm conflicted a straightened
i think that there is an interesting week it's been a democrat
br all school judicial cancer
now but back in the days to believe that these guys were for radio but they were stricken
structures
and that they were principle
now i i have been despues about no very naive notion
uh... scalia has
on newly indications
violated this principle over and over again s don't make me go list doesn't please let
me just give you the most recent
citizens united
uh... where scalia overturned
a hundred years of
precedent
to sell oil corporations to give all limited campaign donations okay
but it's not just argues a precedent that he overturned
and has made him in a activist judge right
but the regional founding fathers
paid big money
they were scared to death of the big banks
they were scared to death of big business read the federalist papers read their intentions
and is abundantly clear
if you told madison and jefferson
corporations will be human beings and have the rights of human beings ever like are you
happy kidding me yet severs at might he shot you about today
soprano at every level of interrogation of the people wrote the document
what a joke you are school where what cloud yeah i think that starts conservatives like
sculley at you know interpret the at
constitution when it comes to in favor of whatever their beliefs are what i have a political
analyst i live so no question so it's cool as a joke happening outside
looking the uh... the question is what what what balance you trait
ziggy if you say equal protection
uh... and i could mean x_y_ and i could be no meanwhile i it by it and
although the courts the site
i started to get a little concerned i but at the same time a_b_c_ no you only can take
the intention of the people both on and eighteen sixty eight
right
that's also why a to narrow an unacceptable right
so the question is how you balance that that's a really tough questions yes
and this case it's so broad
the agreement say the intention was for them to
eroded brought on purposes has said
and that it would get expanded and many of the rights we have on the constitution
had been expanded by the time they've reach eighteen sixty
so it's not like the legislators didn't see that coming
so in that for the equal protection clause which is immensely broad to be applied to
women and other
uh... minorities
of call us of qualities of a break
as the school is being disingenuous here
uh... but but one cricket in a personal note on this
i think the fourteenth amendment
is broader than most people think it is right
in this case
and i don't know why the drawing at me
outside what not because of
derbyshire muslim or or anything like that right
but uh...
the you know every says you have to be
born here in the united states become president likes us in the constitution and it's so hard
but the commanders amend the constitution
and the fourteenth amendment said that we
equal protection of the law
and that we all get to process that separates that are
so if
that amended the constitution to give me equal protection why why does it apply to me then
to say that i don't have the same mites is other citizens the run for office yeah
actually everything on
no i did and that by umar constitutional law professor uh...
back in law school
and here to accept
i never thought of
but they
cities like well that would be a unique argument mister huber
my guess is your cases would be very low
uh... at the base side is the fact that they haven't done it before
and they haven't no cases really come up
pleasant ones really pretty papa hi not right
but now i'm just said i'm not saying anything
imagine fiscally about input
sorry planning on running for office is that what i'm not saying a antibiotic to run for
office just democrats right
okay god uh... but
uh... imagine me run for office
that they may have as they have andrea