Scalia Questions Breyer During ‘Testy’ Supreme Court Argument

The chief justice had to step in Monday when Justice Antonin Scalia grilled a colleague on a lawmaker’s interpretation of a law.

A New York Times story reporting on the exchange called the oral arguments “unusually testy.” The issue before the U.S. Supreme Court was whether a federal law obliges the federal government to pay lawyers to represent their clients in state clemency proceedings. The United States claims the law applies only to federal executive clemency proceedings, while a convicted murderer in Tennessee says state clemency cases are also covered.

The exchange began when Justice Stephen G. Breyer said U.S. Rep. John Conyers Jr., D-Mich., believed the law applied to state proceedings. Scalia disdains using legislators’ statements to determine the meaning of laws. The Times published parts of the exchange:

Scalia: “I thought this was a federal law. Is this a Conyers law? …”

Breyer: “He happens to be the person who wrote it. …”

Scalia: “Did his colleagues know what he said?”

Breyer: “Yes, they did.”

Roberts then stepped in. “Counsel, you lead,” he said to the assistant solicitor general arguing for the government. “We direct our questions to counsel.”

The case is Harbison v. Bell, according to the Wall Street Journal Law Blog. It titled its post on the exchange, “Harbison v. Bell or Scalia v. Breyer?”