His interpretation of the constitution was the sole reason why he was there.
Sirous Martel
1

I agree his interpretations would be the sole reason why he was chosen… If his interpretations did in practice, continue to alienate certain Americans, should that be ignored? One step further, it wasn’t only that his views harmed certain Americans as an unintended consequence due to his “just following the rules”; it is the fact that one can use our constitution to promote damaging personal beliefs. Clearly the Justice felt that not all of us are equal as evidenced by his commentary on Blacks and university. However that same constitution that we are to follow guarantees that same Black group equal rights. He interpreted that amendment in a way that further disenfranchised Blacks, including my future children, based on his own beliefs that Blacks were too “slow” to compete in the Ivy League. Now how is that ok? Because he made his interpretation seem as if it was his typical strict constructionist view PRIOR to those tapes surfacing of his true beliefs. That’s why I’m proposing that using the constitution in this manner is dangerous. It is ten times more dangerous when one can cover up the fact that they don’t really believe that all men are made equally with BRILLIANT legal interpretation of the constitution… for 30 years at that! Justice doesn’t work that way, or SHOULD not work that way.