&gt; And as such, they have the right to try to get those opinions represented.<p>At best, Scalia represented the opinions of an opinionated and influential but not truly representative minority of the population.<p>Now - there&#x27;s nothing in the constitution that says explicitly that the Supreme Court should be a representative body.<p>But the political reality is that judges aren&#x27;t picked for the SC because they&#x27;re the best legal minds of their generation - they&#x27;re chosen for their legal minds <i>and for their politics.</i><p>IMO, in a representative democracy, the political values of the judiciary and especially of the SC should be broadly similar to those of the population.<p>Did Scalia bring the SC closer to the values of the median population, or did he move it away from the median?