Dispelling the mystique of U.S. supreme Court Judges

The following essay was written and completed in the days preceding the sudden unexpected death of Judge Antonin Scalia.  So I dedicate this essay (and another one, previously composed) to his outrageous memory.  Judge Scalia described himself as a “textualist” – one who believes that “[it] is the law that governs, not the intent of the lawgiver”.  Judge O.W. Holmes described textualists as those who say, “We do not inquire what the legislature meant, we ask only what the statutes mean.”  With respect for the scholarship of Judge Scalia, I submit the following accidentally timely essay, and one other directly relevant, certainly more important essay, each of which catch me employing truly “textualist” argument, such as was professed by Judge Scalia.  (Scalia himself clarified that “textualism should not be confused with so-called strict constructionism, which brings the whole philosophy into disrepute. I am not a strict constructionist, and no one ought to be.”)  Read it only if you can appreciate the irony of someone like me honoring the spirit of Antonin Scalia.  Both of them are direct, concise, easy reading. And the one that follows, below, is also light-hearted.