I have a little man-crush on Antonin Scalia.
After all, how many Supreme Court Justices could call a decision “jiggery-pokery”? Mr. Scalia did in his dissension to the King v. Burwell decision, otherwise known as the Care Package for the Unaffordable Care Act. Here he was absolutely right on the Law and right that lay readers and lawyers alike “would think the answer would be obvious — so obvious there would hardly be a need for the Supreme Court to hear a case about it.”
Next up, Obergefell v. Hodges, otherwise known as the Same Sex Marriage Decision. Here Mr. Scalia is wrong on the Law but dead-bang on in his description of the Court and the fallacious route they took to arrive at the right decision:
“Take, for example, this Court, which consists of only nine men and women, all of them successful lawyers who studied at Harvard or Yale Law School. Four of the nine are natives of New York City. Eight of them grew up in east- and west-coast States. Only one hails from the vast expanse in-between. Not a single Southwesterner or even, to tell the truth, a genuine Westerner (California does not count).”
“The opinion is couched in a style that is as pretentious as its content is egotistic… one would think Freedom of Intimacy is abridged rather than expanded by marriage. Ask the nearest hippie.”