The Washington Post's Robert Barnes writes about the glee that has resulted from U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's mistake in his dissent in a case about the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to regulate pollution.
Scalia said the EPA had advocated a cost-conscious approach to setting air quality standards in a 2001 case, but it was the industry that asked the court to consider costs. Scalia's opinion later was updated.
"One of the things that made the overheated takedowns so gleeful was Scalia’s reputation as the court’s most acidic — and funny — writer," Barnes writes.
Lawyer and Legal Journalist
