Perhaps a balanced bookMike Rappaport

about Justice Scalia, according to Jeffrey Rosen, but certainly not a balanced review by Rosen.  Rosen can't seem to avoid criticizing Scalia throughout the review, even where his criticism seems incoherent.  Rosen claims that Scalia enforces his subjective views under the cloak of originalism, and claims as support the criticisms of Scalia by conservatives such as McConnell and Wilkinson.  But McConnell's critique of Scalia's religious views does not suggest that Scalia favors religious liberty too much but too little.  If Scalia were enforcing his subjective views, one might expect him to protect religious liberty too much, given Rosen's suggestion that Scalia's religious views are important to him.  And Wilkinson's critique of Heller is not very originalist and is rejected by most originalists that I know.