The Librarian Who Speaks Too Loudly

Justice Scalia argued that Originalism was the lesser of two evils, the librarian who speaks too softly rather than the librarian who speaks too loudly. What do you think he meant by this?

I think Judge Posner's defense of the Living Constitution as a common law constitution perhaps best explains Scalia's view. Judge Posner said the quiet part out loud when he recently explained that constitutional law is a body of law that is "legislative in character, [with] the judges being the legislators."

Do you agree with Posner's view of the Living Constitution and the role of the judiciary in legislating constitutional law? Is that the job of federal courts under separation of powers and Tenth Amendment federalism?

Is this view consistent with the Rule of Law? Or is it the Law of Rulers?

Is there any objective way to critique living constitutional decisions? If the Living Constitution is subjective, whatever 5 Justices say it is, how can a lawyer argue that the decision is wrong as a matter of law? You can say "I don't like the result" but how can you say the decision is legally wrong?

 If the Constitution is not law, just subjective results imposed by judicial power, why should citizens respect the Court's decrees?