SCOTUS: Say it to my face

 I agree with Justices Scalia & Thomas.

Justice Kennedy, you're full of crap.

(Yeah, I know...it seems very weird to say that.)

Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, deciding whether or not the confrontation clause applies to scientific evidence presented in court. This would be the fingerprint evidence, the DNA or hair sample that is offered as proof of guilt or innocence.

Previously, there was no constitutional requirement that the people who prepare this evidence be available for cross-examination.

Thanks in part to Scalia and Thomas, now there is.

Meaning if you're on trial and the prosecutor presents a damning crime scene report linking you to the crime - you have a right to haul the guy who wrote it into court to explain how he came to those conclusions and what methods he followed.

By itself, that doesn't seem like too big a deal, but when you consider that in many jurisdictions, such evidence is shielded from deeper scrutiny - you get an idea of what's so messed up.

Guy testifies that he saw me at the crime scene - my lawyer gets to cross examine him on the stand. See if he's credible, if he's a drunk, if he's pathological, if he has vision problems.

If that same guy works in a state crime lab and writes a report saying he found my fingerprints at the crime scene - all I used to be able to do was read the report. I could rebutt the evidence with my own experts - but if the author of the report was an incompetent. I'd never get to know.

And just yesterday, I was wondering if Justice Thomas gave a damn about anyone's rights because of this this:

Unlike the majority, however, I would hold that the search of Savana Redding did not violate the Fourth Amendment. (Safford Unified School Dist. #1 v. Redding)

That was his view of how school officials strip searched a 13-year old girl, against her will, without parental consent, to locate a single tablet of ibuprofen.

Once that kind of conduct is acceptable, you wonder what is left to defend.

Thomas' concurring opinion in Melendez-Diaz is pretty brief - so you wonder if he's grudgingly going along because Scalia told him to, or if he genuinely believes that the constitution exists and that it can be used to protect the rights of citizens.

Amazing.

More amazing, (to my mind anyway) is that Justices Kennedy & Breyer dissent - LOUDLY - against this opinion. They are joined by Roberts and Alito (which surprises me not at all), but Breyer thinks we should not be allowed to confront those who accuse us in the form of an evidence report?

Yikes.