What about this sitting Supreme Court Justice?

[Frankie117]

Originally Posted by saganista

I was originally commenting on the quality of Thomas's opinions which -- while often ending wrongly in my opinion -- tend to be serious, thoughtful, consistent, and well-written works. Justice Scalia by contrast tends to produce rambling, simplistic, and relatively incoherent opinions. Both coming from a conservative viewpoint, they do often enough vote together, though 99.99% would likely be an overestimate, especially if matters of separate concurrences and dissents are taken into consideration. I am only voicing my own impressions here, but I basically don't have the level of juridical problems with Justice Thomas (other than his being wrong so often) as I would with Justice Scalia. I would consider Justice Scalia to be reckless and dangerous in both temperament and philosophy. And he's wrong most of the time, too.

I am not fan of Thomas or Scalia, nor any SC justice for that matter, but to declare an opinion that is highly subjective to be wrong seems a bit narrow minded, wouldn't you say? I will go ahead and admit that I have not gone through all of the records of either one, but it would seem that few cases that I reviewed really demand a decision that was influenced by ideology. There are a few exceptions, and I am sure there will be a few more in the future, but as it stands I have yet to see how a decision can be wrong without just looking at them from the "other" side of the fence.

Personally, I've always felt that a SCJ should be moderate and more objective. Instead it seems that the choices refect pushing the agenda of the incumbent party to a position that has so much authority. The choice should not be taken lightly considering that the position is a lifelong appointment...