It truly is sad that Scalia didn't have the opportunity to show how he had come to the conclusion that the Respondent(s) in Dollar General Corporation v. T
HE
M
ISSISSIPPI
B
AND OF
C
HOCTAW
I
NDIANS
;
T
HE
T
RIBAL
C
OURT OF THE
M
ISSISSIPPI
B
AND OF
C
HOCTAW
I
NDIANS
;
C
HRISTOPHER
A.
C
OLLINS
,
IN HIS OFFICIAL
CAPACITY
;
J
OHN
D
OE
,
A MINOR
,
BY AND THROUGH HIS
PARENTS AND NEXT FRIENDS
J
OHN
D
OE
S
R
.
AND
J
ANE
D
OE, should prevail. His unlikely, but factual support and empathy for said respondents, would have cast a more reflective light of his understanding about the Constitution, Judiciary, and Advise and Consent. Something sorely lacking in the current public discourse.