Which goes to show you that people, even Supreme Court Justices, are not infallible. However, if Scalia changed the opinion he wrote, after voting based on another opinion, does that make his ground less tenable? Had his dissent from the majority been part of the majority instead, would that been grounds for a future SCOTUS overturning the decision on the basis that this was not settled law?WASHINGTON (AP) — Supreme Court opinions are rarely susceptible to the kind of fact-checking that reporters usually employ on politics. But Justice Antonin Scalia's hearty dissent in an environmental case this week contained such a glaring error of fact — misreporting an earlier case in which Scalia himself wrote the majority opinion — that the justice changed the opinion. The court quietly posted the corrected version on its website without notice.
Finally, Scalia's misquoting his own case in his opinion does make me snicker a little. LOL.
Article is here.