Well, on this particular issue he has shown himself as having a set-in-stone opinion. But considering he has been grappling with the living constitution issue for most of his professional life, how much openness can he (or any of the other justices) have for different conclusions than the one he has reached on what is the fundamental question of constitutional law. I doubt Ginsburg goes into each conference session saying "You know Antonin, this time you almost convinced me that rigid strict constructionism is the way to go."
He has spent 30 years looking at the question and decided that only retards could have reached a certain conclusion. I disagree with him, but I'm not upset by it. Also, having heard him speak in person before and having been surprised by his sarcastic wit, I doubt he literally thinks you're an idiot (at least not because of this issue; my sense is he thinks 99% of the people are idiots compared to him and he might be right).
|