Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner

1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
824 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/a ... .html#more
It’s a decision that Justice Scalia, in his dissent, derides as “nothing other than the elevation of judge-supposed legislative intent over clear statutory text,†requiring him to provide a brief tutorial in “Statutory Interpretation 101.†Given the “colorful†(as Justice Breyer, writing for the majority, puts it mildly) language that the case inspired, one would expect the subject matter to be something weighty and controversial â€" abortion, perhaps, or the death penalty. Au contraire â€" at issue in Zuni Public School District v. Department of Education was the formula used by the Secretary of Education to determine whether a state may reduce its own funding to account for federal aid . . . a case that (in theory) only Chevron aficionados and statisticians could love.
...
As pointed out on SCOTUSblog, the opinion contains some Scalia gems â€" “that miraculous redeemer of lost causes, Church of the Holy Trinity“; the “judicial libidoâ€; the “School of Textual Subversion.†Lastly, he calls the majority’s statutory interpretation “sheer applesauce.â€
I just love Scalia's opinion wording :)
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
68,642 Posts
Having concluded that “the plain language of the Impact Aid statute compels the conclusion that the Secretary’s method of calculation is ultra vires,†Justice Scalia then devotes the next seven pages or so to, in essence, making fun of the majority opinion and Justice Stevens’s concurrence.
Oh, the lifetime appointment must be nice! :D
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
68,642 Posts
But this portion of his dissent really does hit the nail on the head.

“[t]he only sure indication of what Congress intended is what Congress enacted; and even if there is a difference between the two, the rule of law demands that the latter prevail. This case will live with Church of the Holy Trinity as an exemplar of judicial disregard of crystal-clear text. We must interpret the law as Congress has written it, not as we would wish it to be.â€

The last emphasis is my own, not Justice Scalia's.
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
Top