But I Also Believe That A Lot

Having Had The Good Fortune To Serve Beside Her On Both Courts, I Can Attest That Her Opinions Are Always Thoroughly Considered, Always Carefully Crafted And Almost Always Correct (which Is To Say We Sometimes Disagree). That Much Is Apparent For All To See. What Only Her Colleagues Know Is That Her Suggestions Improve The Opinions The Rest Of Us Write, And That She Is A Source Of Collegiality And Good Judgment In All Our Work.

The Court's Decision Reflects The Philosophy That Judges Should Endure Whatever Interpretive Distortions It Takes In Order To Correct A Supposed Flaw In The Statutory Machinery. That Philosophy Ignores The American People's Decision To Give Congress '[a]ll Legislative Powers' Enumerated In The Constitution. They Made Congress, Not This Court, Responsible For Both Making Laws And Mending Them.

Interior Decorating Is A Rock-hard Science Compared To Psychology Practiced By Amateurs.

What Is A Moderate Interpretation Of The Text? Halfway Between What It Really Means And What You'd Like It To Mean?

More Importantly, The Court Forgets That Ours Is A Government Of Laws And Not Of Men. That Means We Are Governed By The Terms Of Our Laws, Not By The Unenacted Will Of Our Lawmakers. 'if Congress Enacted Into Law Something Different From What It Intended, Then It Should Amend The Statute To Conform To Its Intent.' In The Meantime, This Court 'has No Roving License ... To Disregard Clear Language Simply On The View That ... Congress 'must Have Intended' Something Broader.