Professor Scalia Comes to Capitol Hill: Here Is His Constitutional Lesson Plan

Att; Mr. Cohen; Justice Scalia should be commended for agreeing to speak before the House of Representatives, the sole meaning of the Constitution of the U.S.. He is a learned scholar in regard to all the documents written by the founders for our country. It was designed to protect the people from an over reaching government, who might attempt to relinquish rights from the people, and change the Constitution to conform to a government void of the freedoms it was intended to protect people from, which I believe this to be Tyranny. No one should be allowed to govern this country with intentions toward Socialism/Communism. We wish to be free! We will fight for the Constitution/Declaration of Independence, resisting any attempt to change what our founding fathers fought and died for. It appears that our representatives need to be reminded of the accurate meaning of our greatest documents. Justice Scalia is a proud American and true Patriot. God Bless Him!

"that we know when you are legislating clearly and we know when you are just passing the buck along to us, and usually it's the latter."...................
It has long been my opinion that our US Legislators deliberately write many laws in a vague and incomplete manner, because this allows those who support the many lawyers that occupy those legislative chairs a way around a law that does not necessarily benefit their special interests. By the time the vagueries are interpreted, the money boys have made their profits.

This is just another stunt to give the impression that the tea party folks are in some way more "constitutional" then the rest of the folks who are in office.
Howerevr they might not like what he says, since if he shows bias in his delivery of supposed non-biased law intepretations his own credibility will be even more suspect then it is now by many. This will lead to more cry0baby folks complaining about past decisions. But the GOP and the tea party want questions and more doubts, this is the only way their "cause" or their destruction of the way Freedom and equality are seen can move forwards. Freedom and actual American sp[irit, is NOT the intent of the tea party folks, nor those who support their extreme views of this nations past, and future.
just a thought based on todays article.

The Supreme Court certainly was not treated as a coequal branch of government last year at the State of the Union by President and so-called constitutional scholar Obama. Obama's vicious ambush attack on the justices was and remains a disgrace visited upon a defenseless group attending not out of constitutional duty, but out of respect for the process. Civil discourse would be welcome, starting right at the top.

I wonder if Professor Scalia could comment on where in the Constitution it says the Supremes should decide a presidential election.

There are untold numbers of constitutional scholars in the country, and I find it impolitic and just plain wrong for a sitting member of the Supreme Court to be doing what any of these people could do as well or better. Besides, Scalia is among the most reactionary of the group - do we need to allow the Supreme Court(supposed to be an impartial arbiter on constitutional issues) to advise the already divided and belligerent Congress on how to become even more so? This should NOT be permitted to happen!

In religion and spirituality, a pilgrimage is a very long journey or search of great moral significance. Sometimes, it is a journey to a shrine of importance to a person's beliefs and faith. Members of many major religions participate in pilgrimages. A person who makes such a journey is called a pilgrim

I think Obama needs to sit in on this lesson....quick, and bring his recorder for reference. Maybe if the Congressmen would slow down long enough to write the laws rather than rubberstamping the wish lists of special interests, the laws would be decipherable. It seems obvious that lawmakers should really know what is in the bills before voting for it. Duh. I'm all for separation of powers, again, Obama needs a review session on this.

This is from the point of view a man who hunts with Dick Cheney, and Selected W Bush over the winner Al Gore?
What is he saying? "If you make this law, we will declare it unconstitutional"?
Judges should not have the right to teach the law makers what they will or will not declare anything. They are supposed to be 3 separate branches. Congress, judges and, President.
The President can't make one law! The Court should not be allowed to tell the Congress what laws to pass. They only get to decide AFTER if they are constitutional!
Thomas and Scalia are good subjects to consider for impeachment. Yes, it can be done... Read the Constitution!

Now lets see, according to Andrew Cohen...the Constitution itself is just such an "ambiguous, incomplete and often contradictory" legal document! Well I'm not a million dollar lawyer but it appears to me that the Constitution, especially the "Bill of Rights" is plainly written. Its only when liberal activist judges want to make laws opposed to the Constitution and our freedoms is when controversity enters the picture. Judicial Actvism Is a Myth... see previous sentence. "usefulness of civility and respect in government work" Its OK for Judges but Lawmakers are suppose to do the will of the people, and fight by any means to accomplish their contitutents wishes. The call for CIVILITY is just an attempt to silence the opposition to the Administration's radical deviation from the norm. just as your incorporation of CIVILOGUE is.