You can’t touch me! I have the Supreme Court backing me
I seems that U.S. Supreme Court judge Antonin Scalia is in love with Jack Bauer, of the TV show 24, and his methods of persuasion. He seems to be keen on the idea that the use of torture is necessary in some cases. How do you like that?
We have previously touched upon this subject of Jack Bauer here.
What would Jack Bauer do? – TheGlobeAndMail.com: Justice Antonin Scalia is one of the most powerful judges on the planet.
The job of the veteran U.S. Supreme Court judge is to ensure that the superpower lives up to its Constitution. But in his free time, he is a fan of 24, the popular TV drama where the maverick federal agent Jack Bauer routinely tortures terrorists to save American lives. This much was made clear at a legal conference in Ottawa this week.
Senior judges from North America and Europe were in the midst of a panel discussion about torture and terrorism law, when a Canadian judge’s passing remark – “Thankfully, security agencies in all our countries do not subscribe to the mantra ‘What would Jack Bauer do?’ ” – got the legal bulldog in Judge Scalia barking.
The conservative jurist stuck up for Agent Bauer, arguing that fictional or not, federal agents require latitude in times of great crisis. “Jack Bauer saved Los Angeles. … He saved hundreds of thousands of lives,” Judge Scalia said. Then, recalling Season 2, where the agent’s rough interrogation tactics saved California from a terrorist nuke, the Supreme Court judge etched a line in the sand.
Somebody seems to be unaware of the difference between fiction and reality…
Gospel according to Jack
“Tell me where the bomb is or I will kill your son.”
“I don’t want to bypass the Constitution, but these are extraordinary circumstances.”
“I need to use every advantage I’ve got.”
“If we want to procure any information from this suspect, we’re going to have to do it behind closed doors.”
“I’m talking about doing what’s necessary to stop this warhead from being used against us.”
“When I’m finished with you, you’re gonna wish that you felt this good again.”
“You don’t have any more useful information, do you?”
Maybe he should put this on a card and carry it in his wallet.
This is our lawmaker, we are so screwed. So now, lets hear from the armchair Bauers who cant distinguish TV from life.
Jesus Christ, it’s FICTION. Our country is destroying itself from within as our own leadership constantly demonstrates that they have a fantasy version of reality they keep trying to force America into. Conservative now means spendthrift, Patriot now means giving up liberty, and leadership now means shoving everyone who is weaker than you on every level and venue.
“fictional or not, federal agents require latitude in times of great crisis.”
Now there is an activist judge. Our system right now is that Jack Bauer has NO AUTHORITY to use torture. So, if he does it, the evidence gained cannot be used in court AND he could be sued by the aggreived party.
On balance, a fair deal.
#1, Scalia is not a lawmaker. Since he is not an activist, he doesn’t start trying to make his own laws to suit his preferences. Rather, he lets the elected lawmakers make th laws, and he rules as to what the law is.
Government agents should not be allowed to vote.
Actually, make that all government employees should not be able to vote. Police, firemen, USPS employees, village hall bureaucrats, yadayadayada.
Ahhh what can you say. Were they using movies as actual history when he went to school as well. Methinks not.
I’m biased but Bravo to the Canadian judge.
The politics of fear that America is integrating into every aspect of their lives is getting really tiresome. It reeks of cowardice.
#2 is right on the money. Maybe Kiefer Sutherland needs to get on TV and make a “get a life” speech. Some people can’t discern fact from fiction.
further to #8
[ed. – please use tinyurl when providing links]
http://tinyurl.com/2ta8af (YouTube video of Willian Shatner’s Get a Life Sketch in SNL)
just out of curiosity — how does the open advocation of something such as the torture of human beings not qualify this guy as an ACTIVIST JUDGE?
don’t most conservative abhor the idea of judges pushing a personal agenda?
i fully expect one of the conservatives on this list to proffer an explanation, because frankly, i’m befuddled.
Hell Yea Jack Bauer.
#10, easy, they’re only pushing a personal agenda if they’re libruls
#11 – You do know Keifer is a “gasp” liberal?
#12 AS opposed to a fascist agenda, Herr Sturmbanfuher?.
#3 – Now there is an activist judge.
Testify Brother! It’s nice to see that conservative doesn’t actually mean adherence to original intent at all… It just means a different agenda than the liberal agenda.
#6 – Oh Jesus H Christ Riding A Giant Lizard With His Hair On Fire! WTF are you babbling on about?
Are you actually promoting the idea that by serving in some capacity within the government should preclude you from having the rights bestowed upon the citizens of the country that very government is charged with serving?
Why? And further, what possible aspect of this blog entry inspired you to write such an amazingly idiotic statement as that? And finally, are you drunk?
#10 – #12 – See #3 🙂
#10, he would be an activist if he imposed his personal views as a judge. Simply having these views doesn’t make one an activist. For example if he said that the Constitution requires states to provide vouchers for kids to go to private or religious schools, that would make him an activist. If Congress outlawed torture, and he said government agents had this right inherently in the Constitution(what judge Taney said in Dred Scott about slavery), that would make him an activist. It’s possible to want the law to be one thing while ruling differently as a judge. This is what Alito did with regards to abortion decisions as a district judge.
#15 — thank you
i know normally i get all rant-y in my comments, but that makes sense
i still think it’s creepy that people i know personally think it’s okay to torture someone even if there’s a decent chance the person is completely innocent; and when people in power believe that, it REALLY creeps me out.
let’s hope you are correct and that this judge remembers that our constitution expressly forbids cruel and unusual punishment
#15, Mike,
As usual, you have no idea what you are talking about. An activist Judge is one who rulings disagree with Right Wing Nut Neo-con Evangelical Conservative Republican ideal.
BTW, the Dred Scott case was correctly decided according to the laws in effect at the time.
#16, I don’t think cruel and unusual punishment would have any bearing on torture. That generally refers to sentences at trial, and maybe treatment in prison. What Jack Bauer does is different. There you would have maybe the 5th amendment due process rights, and more importantly, federal law disallowing such behaviors.
#17, I can buy that Dred Scott was correctly decided, but the judge seemed to be stretching to create a right to slavery in the Constitution.