Appearing as a guest on Friday's MSNBC Live with Stephanie Ruhle, contributor Michael Steele was true to form as an MSNBC Republican as he mocked conservatives for disapproving of liberal victories in recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings, and bizarrely suggested that iconic former conservative Justice Antonin Scalia would approve of the decisions.
Host Ruhle set up the segment by recalling the recent liberal victories on both DACA and LGBTQ rights in spite of a right-leaning majority on the Court:
STEPHANIE RUHLE: Just one day after the Court ruled 5-4 to block the Trump administration from ending a DACA program that protects about 700,000 young immigrants from deportation, and just a few days after Trump appointee Neil Gorsuch sided with Chief Justice John Roberts and the liberal justices to protect the rights of LGBTQ workers.
She then paired liberal Republican Steele with liberal contributor Eddie Glaude as she added:
RUHLE: Joining me now to discuss, my dear friend Eddie Glaude, professor at Princeton University, and Michael Steele, former RNC chairman, two of my favorite guests. Michael, President Trump said this week's rulings are an indication we need new justices. Last I checked, this week was all about the rule of law.
Steele went right to mocking President Donald Trump for speaking out against the decisions, and claimed that the liberal rulings were in line with Scalia's thinking:
MICHAEL STEELE, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Yeah, it was, and he just -- he didn't like the rule, he didn't like the law, and he apparently didn't like the constitutional underpinnings of the decision, particularly with respect to the Title VII case. What you see there was actually the spirit of Justice Scalia who, as everyone knows, was a textualist on the Court.
He further condescended to conservatives as he asserted that the Court's reasoning was "way too logical" for Republicans on the LGBTQ rights issue:
STEELE: He looked at the plain reading of the text and applied the Constitution to it and, in this case, made the argument around the basis of one sex as you would if it was a female complainant or male complainant. So he just -- he took it to its logical conclusion, and apparently that was way too logical for Lindsey Graham and way too logical for Donald Trump and others -- other conservatives who are back on their heels.
He then cheered for conservatives to be disappointed by future Court rulings as he concluded:
STEELE: And I've said for some time that, you know, people need to be careful in assuming that because these individuals are politically conservative, that they are judicially such. And if they are truly contextualists -- if they are truly constitutionalists -- then you're going to see more decisions like this. I mean, the flood gates opened with the health care decision. We now have a DACA decision -- we have an LGBTQ decision where conservatives are going, "What happened?" Well, what happened is the spirit of Scalia.
Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of the Friday, June 19, MSNBC Live with Stephanie Rule:
9:50 a.m. Eastern
STEPHANIE RUHLE: A live look back at the city of Atlanta on this Juneteenth -- people filling parks, about to take to the streets to support this important day. And this morning, the Supreme Court is emerging as a flashpoint for the 2020 election. Just one day after the Court ruled 5-4 to block the Trump administration from ending a DACA program that protects about 700,000 young immigrants from deportation, and just a few days after Trump appointee Neil Gorsuch sided with Chief Justice John Roberts and the liberal justices to protect the rights of LGBTQ workers.
Joining me now to discuss, my dear friend Eddie Glaude, professor at Princeton University, and Michael Steele, former RNC chairman, two of my favorite guests. Michael, President Trump said this week's rulings are an indication we need new justices. Last I checked, this week was all about the rule of law.
MICHAEL STEELE, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Yeah, it was, and he just -- he didn't like the rule, he didn't like the law, and he apparently didn't like the constitutional underpinnings of the decision, particularly with respect to the Title VII case. What you see there was actually the spirit of Justice Scalia who, as everyone knows, was a textualist on the Court.
He looked at the plain reading of the text and applied the Constitution to it and, in this case, made the argument around the basis of one sex as you would if it was a female complainant or male complainant. So he just -- he took it to its logical conclusion, and apparently that was way too logical for Lindsey Graham and way too logical for Donald Trump and others -- other conservatives who are back on their heels.
And I've said for some time that, you know, people need to be careful in assuming that because these individuals are politically conservative, that they are judicially such. And if they are truly contextualists -- if they are truly constitutionalists -- then you're going to see more decisions like this. I mean, the flood gates opened with the health care decision. We now have a DACA decision -- we have an LGBTQ decision where conservatives are going, "What happened?" Well, what happened is the spirit of Scalia.
RUHLE: I don't know who your "everyone" is, Michael, but I love the fact that you think everyone knew that Scalia was a contextualist of the Court.
