Attack the Messenger, Particularly If His Name Is Scalia
True to liberal form, when you can’t win an argument on the merits attack the messenger. In this case, the messenger is none other Justice Antonin Scalia.
Yesterday Scalia delivered a scathing dissent in the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision to grant habeas corpus to Guantanamo detainees. I agree with the result of the opinion, but I haven’t read it. I wonder if former State Department lawyer David Kaye has either. One thing is certain, Kaye downed a big box of Wheaties thinking that he could take on one of the greatest legal minds of my lifetime.
True to liberal form, Kaye doesn’t attack Scalia’s arguments. He criticizes Scalia’s “tone”. Kaye builds straw men to knock down. Where is his analysis of Scalia’s actual dissent?
The only portion of Scalia’s dissent quoted by Kaye is the same old stuff we heard on the evening news. “It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed”. That’s a statement of opinion. Scalia would acknowledge it as such.
Whether I agree with Justice Scalia or not (and in this rare instance I don’t), his opinion deserves better analysis than one quote and a pile of straw.
Sphere: Related ContentIf you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment