He still makes the argument as resolutely as ever; it has just become transparent rather than convincing. His circuitous argument against judicial review itself moots much of his argument AND job. I have more faith in John Marshalls constitutional interpretation (and that of all his successors) than in Anton Scalias, and not just because Marshalls ruling PRECEDED his dotage. How selectively self-serving is Scalias supposedly strict constructionism:

So where was Scalias strict construction when he voted with the majority to jump into Floridas 2000 election and forbid the statewide recount the STATE Supreme Court ordered? Answer: It disappeared in a puff of partisanship.