And now a proposal for a game. The poem above uses all of Scalia’s italicized words strung together in order, with line breaks and punctuation. But could there have been a more stirring rendition if they were scrambled? And are there Scalia dissents out there with even greater poetic possibilities? […]
The rules: you don’t get to use the words in footnotes, or any of the Latin or case names. Also out are italics Scalia uses to imagine how some future judge might edit a decision he doesn’t like—a slight pity in the case of Windsor, as it excludes such phrases as “enjoying constitutionally protected sexual relationships.”
I never would’ve thought I’d mention Scalia and poetry in the same post. But Davidson makes it work.
Thoughts?