Justice Antonin Scalia thinks a hand-held rocket launcher is permissible under the Second Amendment.
In the wake of a massacre in Colorado that left 12 dead and 58 wounded, host Chris Wallace asked Scalia if the Constitution would support assault-type AR-15 rifles and 100-round clips.
The justice explained that under his principle of originalism, some limitations on weapons were possible. Fox example, laws to restrict people from carrying a “head axe” would be constitutional because it was a misdemeanor when the Constitution was adopted in the late 1700s.
“What about these technological limitations?” Wallace wondered. “Obviously, we’re not now talking about a handgun or a musket, we’re talking about a weapon that can fire a hundred shots in a minute.”
“We’ll see,” Scalia replied. “Obviously the amendment does not apply to arms that can not be carried. It’s to ‘keep and bear’ so it doesn’t apply to cannons.”
“But I suppose there are handheld rocket launchers that can bring down airplanes that will have to — it will have to be decided,” he added.
So a head axe would be prohibited, but a small nuke — which can fit on a rocket launcher — would be permissible?
Oh, by the way, ladies, according to Mr. Justice, you have no right to contraception.
“Nobody ever thought that the America people voted to prohibit limitations on abortions,” the 76-year-old conservative justice explained. “There’s nothing in the Constitution that says that.”
“What about the right to privacy that the court found in 1965?” Wallace pressed.
“There’s no right to privacy in the Constitution — no generalized right to privacy,” Scalia insisted.
“Well, in the Griswold case, the court said there was,” Wallace pointed out.
“Yeah, it did,” Scalia agreed. “And that was wrong.”
Under the principle of originalism, the Constitution “simple [sic] doesn’t cover” abortion,” he added. “Which means it’s left to — it’s left to democratic choice as most things are, even important things like abortion.”
In its 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut decision, the court found that Connecticut could not prohibit the use of contraception because people have a “right to marital privacy.”
I’m not a lawyer, but I know a right-wing whacko when I see one, and this particular one sits on the highest court in the land.