Shame-OUT: Supreme Court Scalia can't take the heat!

• 

Simply Shameful.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (on the right) lives in a pigsty, but doesn't want to admit it.

Or more accurately:

He lives in a glass house, and said,
"It's ok to throw rocks at someone who lives in a glass house, but don't you dare throw one at mine!!"

ABC (via AP) says:
But Wait. Before I go into the article, Let me say this again.

Justice Scalia (at a conference hosted by the Institute of American and Talmudic Law), said: "Every single datum about my life is private? That's silly!"

In a speech earlier this year, Scalia said,: "that he was not bothered by the availability of such information. "I don't find that particularly offensive," he said. "I don't find it a secret what I buy, unless it's shameful."

He added there's some information that's private, "but it doesn't include what groceries I buy," according to the AP.

Now, I will paraphrase for the emotionally or ethically impaired. The justice says, that there is no such thing as privacy, as there is no such thing as privacy...
Do you disagee? Please reply or just add a comment...

Next: He says it's ok to throw stones, but not at him:
and to quote ABC: Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has criticized the law professor for giving a lesson in how "what is legal may also be quite irresponsible."

Scalia (whom I personally think has just reamed himself another opening in his body cavity-- hint hint hackers anyone?) continued his tirade, when he said:

"It is not a rare phenomenon that what is legal may also be quite irresponsible. That appears in the First Amendment context all the time. What can be said often should not be said. Prof. Reidenberg's exercise is an example of perfectly legal, abominably poor judgment. Since he was not teaching a course in judgment, I presume he felt no responsibility to display any."

Soapbox mode on: I am SO UPSET. This man is one of the 9 people in OUR COUNTRY who decide what is LEGAL and what is not?

I am in a state of shock at the lack of decorum and finesse shown by our supreme court justice. PERHAPS a move to start IMPEACHMENT charges against him for inappropriate conduct unbecoming a supreme, might be a start.

Now, back to the ABC Presentation:
Joel Reidenberg, (they guy in the inset photo on the left above) a professor at Fordham University law school (in NY) assigned a project to students in his information privacy law course. A group project, that is.

His assignment?
Find any publicly available information on the notoriously private Scalia and compile it into a "dossier."

The results?
The class came up with 15 pages of information on the Justice, including:

• his home phone number.
• his food preferences.
• his wife's personal e-mail address.
• photos of his grandchildren.

But:
As professor Reidenberg pointed out,
The dossier has not been made public

and Reidenberg continued,

was {ONLY} intended, as an exercise to show students the amount of personal information that can be easily gleaned from the Web.

Now, I will again paraphrase for the emotionally or ethically impaired.

a) The information was NOT made public, and b) this was designed to show HOW much of our information is on the web.

Lets see... Apparently all hell broke loose, when Professor Reidenberg discussed the assignment at an academic conference last week. As to be expected, his comments were (then) posted on a popular legal blog.

And, to further infuriate Justice Scalia (in my humble opinion) Professor Reidenberg said he assigns a similar project each year. As a matter of fact, he said, he used himself as the test subject last year.

Reidenberg said he (only) picked Scalia after the Justice said during a speech earlier this year (which we dissected above) that he (Justice Scalia) did not believe the law should necessarily protect personal, but easily available, information.

So (again) for the emotionally or ethically impaired, I again opine, that:

Justice Scalia said, that he did not believe the law should necessarily protect personal, but easily available, information.
"Every single datum about my life is private? That's silly," Scalia told a conference hosted by the Institute of American and Talmudic Law, according to an Associated Press account of the conference.


Hey, call me a stickler, but in my humble opinion it is Professor Reidenberg 100, and Justice Scalia love in this match.

Perhaps Justice Scalia should give his seat on the Supremes to Professor Reidenberg, as the spoils of war. I'd say It's time for Justice Scalia to
a) stop speaking in public
b) Pray that a recall/impeachment drive for his seat does not start up (hint -hint!)
c) pray his time on life and Justice (after all, it was a seminar on TALMUDIC law!) is not used up.

Cheers, and comments quotes always welcome.