Scalia: Women Don't Have Constitutional Protection Against Discrimination

Scalia: Women Don't Have Constitutional Protection Against Discrimination: "The argument against ERA last time was that it was unnecessar­y, because, as we all Read More... thought, the 14th A covered this issue."

Dems and liberals need to get their money's worth from their losses last november: make the GOP pay dearly for wanting to control Congress.

ask them if they agree with Scalia's interpreta­tion.
If they say no, drive a wedge between GOP and conservati­ve wing of SCOTUS.
If they say yes they agree with Scalia, ask if they support amending the USC to remedy the issue.

DEMS: You have 2 short years to learn to play win-win politics. For the past 2 years you were unable to make lemonade from all the lemons the GOP handed you.

Go find a receipe before it is too late again."...

..."Marcia Greenberger, founder and co-president of the National Women's Law Center, called the justice's comments "shocking" and said he was essentially saying that if the government sanctions discrimination against women, the judiciary offers no recourse.

Marcia Greenberger, founder and co-president of the National Women's Law Center, says, "In these comments, Justice Scalia says if Congress wants to protect laws that prohibit sex discrimination, that's up to them," she said. "But what if they want to pass laws that discriminate? Then he says that there's nothing the court will do to protect women from government-sanctioned discrimination against them. And that's a pretty shocking position to take in 2011. It's especially shocking in light of the decades of precedents and the numbers of justices who have agreed that there is protection in the 14th Amendment against sex discrimination, and struck down many, many laws in many, many areas on the basis of that protection."

...and Ann Coulter says that women shouldn't be able to vote.