Scalia says innocence no bar to execution

Right-wing Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is often considered an originalist in matters of constitutional interpretation. But I don't see what's so originalist about this.

Regarding the case of a death row inmate who may challenge his conviction because of evidence showing he may be innocent, Scalia said it's perfectly constitutional to execute an innocent person.

Scalia wrote, "This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent."

What?

Scalia really said that. He said the Constitution allows the execution of someone who a court finds to be innocent.

Where does Scalia come up with this shit?

That's sort of like if people keep blackballing me for things I was accused of saying in The Last Word which I can prove I didn't say. But there's a big difference that makes this story far more serious: Scalia is talking about a murder conviction and a death sentence.

Then again, Antonin Scalia is the man who said the "role model effect" should take priority over the Constitution - a claim that he pulled out of thin air. Scalia is so far removed from constitutional law that one wonders how he ended up on the nation's highest court.

(Source: http://thinkprogress.org/2009/08/17/scalia-actual-innocence)