Antonin Scalia: Constitution doesn't protect Michele Bachmann

Antonin Scalia: The 14th Amendment for me, but not thee.

Antonin Scalia: The 14th Amendment for me, but not thee.

When Michele Bachmann bragged to Lou Dobbs that she'd talked the Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia into teaching teabaggers the Constitution, solo, did she know that Scalia didn't believe the document protects her from discrimination?

That's what he believes, he told the California Lawyer.


He was asked whether, in 1868, when the 39th Congress was proposing the 14th Amendment, its members would have thought that equal protection under the law applied to sex discrimination or to sexual orientation.

Was Congress, a men-only place in 1868, wrong to apply the 14th Amendment to both?

Antonin Scalia: You do not need the Constitution to reflect the wishes of the current society. Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn't. Nobody ever thought that that's what it meant. Nobody ever voted for that.

Scalia, as we mentioned before, calls himself an "originalist." This means that he doesn't believe the Constitution needs to keep pace with society, unless it needs to keep pace with Scalia's personal opinions.

First class starts tomorrow, and U of M law professor Richard Painter told the L.A. Times the whole deal stinks because .

"Michele Bachmann wants the healthcare law to be struck down by the courts. This is not about a particular ethics rule, but rather about common sense. This creates the appearance of partiality and undermines the credibility of the court."

The class is closed to the press. Surprised?