United States v. Wong

Justice Scalia
You think man means women, right? Never mind.
United States v. Wong Source

Comptroller of the Treasury of MD v. Wynne

Justice Scalia
Right, you’re on the principle that life is not fair, right?
Mr. Brockman
Life is not fair. Maryland taxes are.
Comptroller of the Treasury of MD v. Wynne Source

Holt v. Hobbs

Justice Scalia
Well, religious beliefs aren’t reasonable. I mean, religious beliefs are categorical. You know, it’s God tells you. It’s not a matter of being reasonable. God be reasonable? He’s supposed to have a full beard.
Holt v. Hobbs Source

United States v. Wurie

Ms. Mizner
Well, this Court has espoused a warrant presumption...
Justice Scalia
Well, but that — that presumption is — is simply not — you don’t believe that presumption, do you?
United States v. Wurie Source

Am. Trucking Ass'n, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles

Mr. Rosenthal
But we’re not—we’re not dealing with that hypothetical.
Justice Scalia
I know we’re not. That’s why it’s a hypothetical.
Am. Trucking Ass'n, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles Source

Ass'n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc.

Justice Scalia
I join the judgment of the Court, and all of its opinion except Part I–A and some portions of the rest of the opinion going into fine details of molecular biology. I am unable to affirm those details on my own knowledge or even my own belief.
Ass'n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. Source

Hollingsworth v. Perry

Justice Scalia
I’m curious, when -­when did -- when did it become unconstitutional to exclude homosexual couples from marriage? 1791? 1868, when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted? Sometimes -- some time after Baker, where we said it didn’t even raise a substantial Federal question? When -- when -- when did the law become this?
Mr. Olsen
When -- may I answer this in the form of a rhetorical question? When did it become unconstitutional to prohibit interracial marriages? When did it become unconstitutional to assign children to separate schools.
Hollingsworth v. Perry Source

Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter

Justice Breyer
Use whatever word you want. Manifest disregard, stick to the law. Now, suppose the arbitrator had said this, it doesn’t say how to do it. I see how you do it, you get out a magic 8-ball. Now, we would strike that down because that is not relevant. But he didn’t say magic 8-ball. He said class. And there are many class arbitrations. So it isn’t quite magic 8-ball. Now, you explain to me --
Justice Scalia
What’s a magic 8-ball? I don’t know what you are talking about.
Justice Breyer
A magic 8-ball is you have -- that’s a little thing, it’s the -- it’s a non-sportsman’s equivalent of throwing darts.
Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter Source

On Homosexuality

Justice Scalia
If we cannot have moral feeling against homosexuality, can we have it against murder? Can we have it against other things?
On Homosexuality Source

Dan's City Used Cars, Inc. v. Pelkey

Justice Scalia
Well, let me tell you how we — it seems to me we’ve limited it in — in the Columbus case, Columbus v. Harrah’s Garage and Wrecker Services, Inc. We said that, “The clause — the clause’s limitation to motor carrier services with respect to the transportation of property massively limits the scope of preemption to include only laws, regulations, and other provisions that single out for special treatment motor carriers of property.” And here you’ve told us that this case doesn’t involve any law that singles them out for — for special treatment. To the contrary, it’s the general consumer protection law.
Well -
So you want us to eat those words, they were wrong, or — or somehow you don’t come within them?
Respectfully, Justice Scalia, I think those words came from your dissent in that case.
Justice Scalia
Ah. I forgot that.
Dan's City Used Cars, Inc. v. Pelkey Source