March 28, 2012


Justice Scalia was roughed up a little on these very pages, for what I suspect was a little reductio ad absurdum in oral arguments. But after Raich, I'm not gonna defend "Nino." Nope, he can swing in the breeze.

But I do love his rapier wit. James Taranto brings us a good example:

Mr. Kneedler, what happened to the Eighth Amendment? You really want us to go through these 2,700 pages? And do you really expect the Court to do that? Or do you expect us to--to give this function to our law clerks? Is this not totally unrealistic? That we are going to go through this enormous bill item by item and decide each one?

SCOTUS Posted by John Kranz at March 28, 2012 4:39 PM

Perhaps I was a bit too hard on the good Justice. As I mentioned, I normally really like Scalia's opinions (Raich being an exception to that rule).

There is no doubt however, that his wit is quite impressive.

Posted by: Bryan at March 28, 2012 5:11 PM

What Speaker Pelosi really meant was, "We have to pass the bill so that the Supreme Court can read it and tell us what is in it."

Posted by: johngalt at March 29, 2012 11:43 AM | What do you think? [2]