What's not good news? Not following the Constitution -- I dare say neither of them would say that.
Educational point:
The heirarchy of power of governing law in the US is:
1. The Constitution and US Treaties
2. Federal Statutes
3. Presidential Orders and Regulations Implementing Statutes (e.g. EPA Clean Air Act Regs)
4. State Statutes
Now, if one of the 2 or 3 heirarchy laws go against the Constitution (let's say they exceed the powers of the fed gov't vs. the states or they outright violate and Amendment) then it will fall -- making contradictory state statutes win out sometimes.
But, the point is that the Constitution and Treaties are (almost) equal. I know we tend to forget this amidst an administration that wants to forget the parts of American history and laws it does not like, but theoretically we ARE BOUND by treaties such as the Framework Convention on Climate Change and the UN Charter. And, theoretically, any presidential order or federal statute to the contrary falls before a Treaty.
Scalia knows his international law -- if you were interested in being really bored, I could site you to a Sherman Antitrust case where he paid TONS of attention to international law and did about 4 or 5 legal gymnastics manuevers to work around international law. But, we all tend to forget our last arguments when making our current arguemnts.
