Replying to a message of Dan Ceppa to Dave Drum:

 DC>> Scalia stated that torture is not unconstitutional, plain and simple.

 DD>> And that is true. It is NOT unconstitutional. But, it is
illegal ("we
 DD>> have a law against torture" - Scalia).

 DC> There's the rub.  Remember, W's justice department ruled that the
 DC> torture  was legal.  

Actually, most of DoJ was not involved.  Just the cabal of Yoo, Bybee,
Addington (who worked for Cheney and was not in DoJ), Haynes (who
was DoD's top lawyer) and, to a somewhat lesser extent, Paul Wolfowitz
Iwho was also DoD).

 DD>> And you have been equating that to claiming that he said that
 DD>> "kicking the shit out of a suspect" was legal.

 DD>> Scalia also said that there are laws against torture.

 DC>> Yes, laws, laws that can be changed.  It's a defense of the Unitary
 DC>> President Powers that the neocons were pushing.

Perhaps.  I doubt that Scalia would swallow that line, though.  The fact
that the Constitution does not specifically prohibit something does not
automatically mean that one has a Constitutional right to do it.  The
Constitution says nothing about murder, for instance.

 DD>> Therefore, because there is no Constitutional prohibition against an
 DD>> action it is not automatically legal - as you seemed to be proposing
 DD>> in attributing that position to Justice Scalia.

 DC> Care to bet he takes it that route should a case go so far as the SC?  

Yeah, I think I would.

--- FleetStreet 1.19+