BCT Editorial – 5/2/08

This page was last updated on May 3, 2008.

Handle with care; Editorial; Beaver County Times; May 2, 2008.

The editorial subtitle is “Scalia’s comments about torture and punishment reveal how fragile the rule of law really is.”

If you didn’t see the 60 Minutes interview live, here’s the transcript of the entire interview. I’d be willing to bet the Times would prefer we not see it because of the context it provides.

I refuse to believe the Times editorial board is stupid, so I assume this editorial is a deliberate attempt at deception. To do so the editorial sets up a bogus straw man.

The editorial says, “In effect, Scalia is saying is that the government can do anything it wants to those it has in custody and not violate the constitutional standard of cruel and unusual punishment.” No, that is NOT what Justice Scalia said or meant. Leslie Stahl asked a narrow question – perhaps designed to get the desired answer – and Mr. Scalia provided the correct answer to that narrow question.

As used by Justice Scalia, the term “punishment” means the sentence given to a lawfully convicted criminal. If Ms. Stahl had asked Mr. Scalia if torture or mistreatment given as a sentence (punishment) were covered by the “cruel and unusual punishments” provision of the Eighth Amendment, he would have said “yes.” If Ms. Stahl had asked Mr. Scalia if people who violate prisoner mistreatment/torture laws should be prosecuted, he would have said “yes.”

The editorial author knows all of the above. You see, earlier in the interview, Mr. Scalia said, “I don’t like torture. Although defining it is going to be a nice trick. But who’s in favor of it? Nobody. And we have a law against torture. But if the - everything that is hateful and odious is not covered by some provision of the Constitution.”

In summary, this editorial is a sad attempt to smear Justice Scalia. Does the Times look unfavorably on all judges who interpret the law based on what it says, not what they want it to say?