Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf
Page Number: 77

Cite as:  576 U. S. ____ (2015) 

9 

SCALIA, J., dissenting 

really  dislikes.  Hardly  a  distillation  of  essence.    If  the 
opinion  is  correct  that  the  two  clauses  “converge  in  the
identification  and  definition  of  [a]  right,”  that  is  only
because  the  majority’s  likes  and  dislikes  are  predictably 
compatible.)  I  could  go  on.    The  world  does  not  expect 
inspirational  pop-
in  poetry  or 
logic  and  precision 
philosophy;  it  demands  them  in  the  law.  The  stuff  con-
tained  in  today’s  opinion  has  to  diminish  this  Court’s 
reputation for clear thinking and sober analysis. 

* 

* 

* 
Hubris  is  sometimes  defined  as  o’erweening  pride;  and 
pride,  we  know,  goeth  before  a  fall.    The  Judiciary  is  the
“least  dangerous”  of  the  federal  branches  because  it  has
“neither  Force  nor  Will,  but  merely  judgment;  and  must
ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm” and 
the States, “even for the efficacy of its judgments.”26  With 
each decision of ours that takes from the People a question 
properly left to them—with each decision that is unabash-
edly based not on law, but on the “reasoned judgment” of a 
bare  majority  of  this  Court—we  move  one  step  closer  to
being reminded of our impotence. 

—————— 

26 The Federalist No. 78, pp. 522, 523 (J. Cooke ed. 1961) (A. Hamil-

ton).