Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/13pdf/12-158_6579.pdf
Page Number: 41.0

Cite as:  572 U. S. ____ (2014) 

17 

SCALIA, J., concurring in judgment 

* 

* 

* 
We  have  here  a  supposedly  “narrow”  opinion  which,  in
order  to  be  “narrow,”  sets  forth  interpretive  principles 
never before imagined that will bedevil our jurisprudence
(and proliferate litigation) for years to come.  The immedi-
ate product of these interpretive novelties is a statute that 
should  be  the  envy  of  every  lawmaker  bent  on  trapping 
the  unwary  with  vague  and  uncertain  criminal  prohibi-
tions.  All this to leave in place an ill-considered ipse dixit
that  enables  the  fundamental  constitutional  principle  of
limited federal powers to be set aside by the President and 
Senate’s exercise of the treaty power.  We should not have 
shirked  our  duty  and  distorted  the  law  to  preserve  that 
assertion;  we  should  have  welcomed  and  eagerly  grasped
the  opportunity—nay,  the  obligation—to  consider  and 
repudiate it.