UNADULTERATED NONSENSE

Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun, in the twilight of his career, did not just become more liberal; he became more outspoken; so much so that he came as close in his written opinions to telling it like it is as any justice whose opinion I have ever read.

For example, in Webster v. Planned Parenthood (1989), the case that was SUPPOSED to be Casey (which was supposed to overrule Roe, which Blackmun authored), Blackmun, in dissent, called a comment made by dead Chief Justice Rehnquist in the latter's majority opinion as "unadulterated nonsense."

In Casey (1992), Blackmun said, after Rehnquist declared once again his foment of intent to overrule Roe, "Perhaps contraceptive users will be next on the Chief Justice's list of outcasts." Blackmun also called Justice Scalia "uncommonly naive."

In Herrera v. Collins (1993), Blackmun ripped Rehnquist again, by expressing his displeasure at Rehnquist et al's "obvious eagerness to do away with any restriction on the States' power to execute whomever and however they please."

It's nice to see that the spirit of Harry Blackmun is still alive:

WASHINGTON (AP) — A U.S. appeals panel sharply challenged the Bush administration Friday over new rules making it easier for police and the FBI to wiretap Internet phone calls. A judge said the government's courtroom arguments were "gobbledygook."
The skepticism expressed so openly toward the administration's case encouraged civil liberties and education groups that argued that the U.S. is improperly applying telephone-era rules to a new generation of Internet services.
"Your argument makes no sense," U.S. Circuit Judge Harry T. Edwards told the lawyer for the Federal Communications Commission, Jacob Lewis. "When you go back to the office, have a big chuckle. I'm not missing this. This is ridiculous. Counsel!"
At another point in the hearing, Edwards told the FCC's lawyer that his arguments were "gobbledygook" and "nonsense."