What's Scalia been smoking?

Or as David Bernstein at The Volokh Conspiracy puts it somewhat more respectfully than I can muster:

(2) Justice Scalia’s concurrence, unlike Justice Thomas’s dissent, does not address the original meaning of the Commerce Clause. This reflects a pattern with Scalia, apparent also in his affirmative action, First Amendment, and other opinions: he is much more likely to resort to originalist arguments when they can be used to undermine Warren Court precedents that conflict with his deeply held moral and political views than when such arguments would either undermine his political views or challenge precedents that are not on the social conservative (tempered, as in First Amendment cases, by Scalia’s academic elitist solicitude (which I share) for freedom of expression) “hit list.”

Fortunately, I limit my “medicine” to wine and other ethanol products (and not much of them) these days and Scalia made the right decision there.

This entry was posted in Default.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: