obama was not enforcing. and court told them today they can t do that. it is, it s disheartening. let s bring in joan walsh of salon.com, michael medved, and author and torn attorney catherine crier. where do i start? what happens to balls and strikes. katherine crier, we ll ask you. is this the most opinionated we have seen a judge? he s always great fun because there s no question that scalia is a very intelligent man and he can write very powerful, i don t mean they re legally appropriate, but powerful cases, powerful dissents, but when you look at his varying positions, he argues his originalism, and then he says, we re talking about state sovereignty, and state sovereignty s fine when we re talking about the right wing position on immigration but if we re talking about campaign finance reform, maybe it s federal. if we re talking about marijuana, medical marijuana laws, maybe it s federal.
is this the most opinionated we have seen a judge? he s always great fun because there s no question that scalia is a very intelligent man and he can write very powerful, i don t mean they re legally appropriate, but powerful cases, powerful dissents, but when you look at his varying positions, he argues his originalism, and then he says, we re talking about state sovereignty, and state sovereignty s fine when we re talking about the right wing position on immigration but if we re talking about campaign finance reform, maybe it s federal. if we re talking about marijuana, medical marijuana laws, maybe it s federal. you watch the vas lation and the legal theory changing with the ideology and you have to go, wait a minute. there isn t legal consistency to support the reputation he has. joan walsh, what is wrong with what scalia said? well, first of all, i mean, to just jump out of the world of law and the constitution and the
let s bring in joan walsh of salon.com, michael medved, and katherine crier. where do i start? what happens to balls and strikes. is this the most opinionated we have seen a judge? he s always great fun because there s no question that scalia is a very intelligent man and he c can wrielt very powerful, i don t mean they re legally appropriate, but powerful cases, powerful dissents, but when you look at his varying positions, he argues his originalism, and then he says, we re talking about state sovereignty, and it s fine when we re talking about sort of the right wing position on immigration, but if we re talking about campaign finance reform, maybe it s federal. if we re talking about medical marijuana laws. maybe it s federal. you watch the vacillation and the legal theory changing with the ideology and you have to go,