[Excerpt]
... The Justices settled into their usual positions. The diminutive Ruth Bader Ginsburg was barely visible above the bench. Stephen Breyer was twitchy, his expressions changing based on whether or not he agreed with the lawyer’s answers. As ever, Clarence Thomas was silent. (He was in year three of his now six-year streak of not asking questions.)
Then
Antonin Scalia spoke up. More than anyone, Scalia was responsible for
transforming the dynamics of oral arguments at the Supreme Court. When
Scalia became a Justice, in 1986, the Court sessions were often
somnolent affairs, but his rapid-fire questioning spurred his colleagues
to try to keep pace, and, as Roberts said, in a tribute to Scalia on
his twenty-fifth anniversary as a Justice, “the place hasn’t been the
same since.” Alternately witty and fierce, Scalia invariably made clear
where he stood.
He had long detested campaign-spending
restrictions, frequently voting to invalidate such statutes as
violations of the First Amendment. For this reason, it seemed, Scalia
was disappointed by the limited nature of Olson’s claim.
No comments:
Post a Comment