Thursday, March 27, 2008


My Administative Law class has an unspoken theme: What Would Justice Scalia Do?

I'm thinking of having rubber bracelets made up with WWJSD printed on them to distribute before the exam. Of course I won't do this because it requires more initiative than I have right now.

Also, I read a case today that could fairly be boiled down to "We're deferring to the agency cuz this stuff is too hard."

Scalia got cranky in the dissent.


  1. You know, even though I tend to disagree with Scalia more often than I agree with him, and even though the whole "Originalism" thing is total and completely nonsense, Scalia is still probably my favorite Justice, just because I wish I could be as big of a smart ass as he is. He's the king of the "all the other members of this court have the combined intelligence of a shriveled-up shrub and I can't understand how they could possibly have reached such an unbelievably dumb decision, so I respectfully dissent"-type dissent. And that's awesome.

  2. Admin law involved the most confusing cases establishing very simple rules. I hated reading them, like Vermont Yankee, and that one with the agricultural employees vs. regular employees. It was mind numbing.

    Is the Scalia dissent you are referring to the one in Mead? I didn't care too much for that case either.

  3. Buffalodawg

    No -- but my notes for the Mead dissent are as follows: Scalia -- HAVING KITTENS!! (My short hand for 'he's really not happy')

    The one I was thinking of was Pauley v Bethenergy Mines -- black lung disease statute at issue.