Scalia, on healthcare ruling: 'I haven’t had a falling out with Justice Roberts'

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia on Wednesday denied any discord within the high court after Chief Justice John Roberts voted with liberal members of the bench to uphold President Obama's healthcare law.

A report earlier this month from CBS News said Roberts had originally sided with the court's conservative block to strike down the legislation's individual mandate, but later switched sides. The story described the four conservative justices as "infuriated" with Roberts over changing his mind.


But on Wednesday, Scalia told CNN that he and Roberts remain on good terms.

"No, I haven’t had a falling out with Justice Roberts," Scalia told anchor Piers Morgan in an interview aired Wednesday night.

Scalia also told Morgan not to believe media accounts of the court's innerworkings.

"You should not believe what you read about the court in the newspapers," Scalia said. "It’s either been made up or been given to the newspapers by somebody who’s violating a confidence, which means that person is not reliable."

The conservative juror added that while there were occasional clashes over the law, the disagreements rarely turned personal.

"There are clashes on legal questions but not personally," Scalia said. "The press likes to paint us as nine scorpions in a bottle and that’s just not the case at all."

It was a rare interview from a justice on the high court, who tend to shy away from the media and avoid talking to the press.

Scalia also discussed other recent decisions of prominence, including the Bush v. Gore verdict that handed President George W. Bush the presidency in 2000. Scalia said that when he was approached about the case, he often advised questioners to "get over it."

"No regrets at all," Scalia said. "Especially because it's clear that the thing would have ended up the same way anyway. The press did extensive research into what would have happened if Al Gore wanted done had been done, county by county, and he would have lost anyway."

Scalia also defended the court's controversial Citizens United ruling, arguing that super-PAC spending was intellectually indistinguishable from a free press that covered politics.

"You can’t separate speech from the money, that facilitates the speech," Scalia said. "It’s utterly impossible. Could you tell newspapers publishers you can only spend so much money in the publication of your newspaper?"

The longest-serving justice currently on the court also discussed Congress, arguing the legislators of today paled when compared to the founding fathers.

"I wish we had a few of them now. I certainly do not favor tinkering with what they put together," Scalia said.