&gt; I don&#x27;t think that&#x27;s accurate. There is a position, albeit more in the academy than on the bench, that holds that judges should only in the rarest of circumstances hold that the actions of the other branches are unconstitutional. Scalia can&#x27;t fairly be described as being an adherent of that school.<p>My understanding was that Scalia himself explicitly claimed to be following this philosophy.  What makes you say otherwise?