An Addendum on Antonin and the Arts

Article III Groupie didn't realize that Justice Antonin Scalia's recent visit to the Juilliard School, which she just blogged about here and here, was getting so much play in the news media and the blogosphere. The event was actually written up in the New York Times (gavel bang: Ninoville), which also carried, in the same issue, a story about Justice Scalia's upcoming service as grand marshal for New York's Columbus Day Parade this year.

Although Ninomania, the preeminent Scalia blog, has not chimed in yet, several other fine blawgs have discussed Justice Scalia's appearance and speech at Juilliard. If you go to Google Blog Search and run the search Scalia Juilliard, you'll come across a few, including some of A3G's favorite blogs:

--PrawfsBlawg ("To the extent the Solomon Amendment case turns ultimately on government's role as speaker and funder, [Scalia's speech] certainly suggests the orientation of Scalia's vote on this case.");

--Althouse ("What is less sexy than Scalia, et al, deciding what is "a good healthy interest in sex"?");

--Jewdicious (which A3G discovered fairly recently and has been enjoying); and

--Crescat Sententia (which is how A3G first learned of the event, and which kindly interviewed A3G last month).

(The Google Blog Search for Scalia Juilliard did not, however, pick up two of A3G's most beloved blogs: the Volokh Conspiracy, and her own blog.)

Some bloggers and comment-posters have suggested that Justice Scalia's remarks might call into question his impartiality in the Solomon Amendment case. A3G views this as a stretch, resting upon an overreading of the Justice's speech. She tends to agree with the comment posted by "Justice Fuller" at the Volokh Conspiracy: "[Justice Scalia] was just describing the law and views expressed in his prior written opinions." Indeed, Justice Scalia's rather general, almost banal observation that "he who pays the piper calls the tune" contrasts sharply with the far more specific remarks about the Pledge of Allegiance case that caused him to recuse himself in Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow.

Uh-oh, this is veering dangerously into substantive territory -- which A3G leaves to people far more intelligent than she (including, but not limited to, law professors and Supreme Court clerks). Time to get back to the world of gossip!

(Update: Please note Professor Paul Horwitz's clarification in the comments to this post. Various commenters have suggested that Justice Scalia's remarks might call into question his impartiality in FAIR v. Rumsfeld, but Professor Horwitz was not intending to make that point in his PrawfsBlawg post.)

Comments

[David M. Wagner]

I'll comment soon -- tell you what, I promise not to wait until I hear a reason to be happy about Miers!

[Ballabon]

this one's for you, A3G - http://jewdicious.blogspot.com/2005/09/shepping-nachas.html

[Paul Horwitz]

Just to clarify, my post on Prawfsblawg suggests that Scalia's remarks are relevant to understanding his orientation in the Solomon Amendment case, not that they call into question his impartiality in that case. Other commenters elsewhere may have suggested as much, but that certainly wasn't the intent of my own post. Thanks, and thanks as always for your interesting blog.