Here's a cool live-blogging transcript of a Q&A with Justice Scalia. He takes a lot of questions and tackles a bunch of issues (including a persuasive case against using legislative intent to interpret laws), and here's an argument against Roe v. Wade that I hadn't considered before. (All paraphrased.)
Q: Strict originalism, powers to states -- divisions between states? Lots of them? Even more divided society?(HT: Orin Kerr and Will Baude.)
A: Court spends ~1/3 of time sorting out federal system. "Running a federal system is one big pain in the neck." France's system run out of Paris is easier. Ours is worth the trouble b/c federalism produces more happy people. eg. abortion: 51-49, 49 unhappy people. Divide into subgroups of 10. Can't possibly have more than 40 unhappy people. Phenomenon magnified when divisions not random, but geographic. Why should NY have to adopt Utah's approach to abortion? What's the use of a fed'l system if we don't allow states to apply their own views?
Laziness: need 5 votes on the S.Ct. and things are fine, instead of going to 50 state legislatures. He doesn't understand the aversity to diversity.
"My answer is yes, and a good thing too."