'We agree on a whole lot of stuff. Ruth is bad only on the knee-jerk stuff,' Scalia says. Ginsburg, Scalia discuss freedoms

They often seem to be polar opposites on the bench of the U.S. Supreme Court, but Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia sat down together at the National Press Club on Thursday to discuss the First Amendment, government surveillance and their own personal friendship.

Journalist and host Marvin Kalb asked both justices if they could issue an opinion on The Washington Post jointly winning a Pulitzer Prize for its coverage of Edward Snowden and the National Security Agency. They declined to comment about the prize but were willing to discuss how they might approach a potential case that examines the NSA’s surveillance programs.


Scalia said the court is the “least qualified” to decide on the questions posed by the NSA controversy.

( Also on POLITICO: McCutcheon lawyer brings new campaign finance case)

“It’s foolish,” Scalia said. “We know nothing about the degree of the risk. The executive knows. The Congress knows. We don’t know anything, and we’re going to be the one to decide that question?”

Ginsburg said an argument could be made that the NSA is a violation of the Constitution.

While both disagree on a variety of issues — but remain close friends — the justices agreed that freedom of speech is the most important of the freedoms enumerated in the Bill of Rights. Ginsburg also hailed journalism for its importance in a democracy.

“I think the press has played a tremendously important role as watchdog over what the government is doing,” Ginsburg said. “That keeps the government from getting too far out of line. Yes, there are excesses in the press, but we have to put up with that.”

When asked about televising proceedings of the Supreme Court, both justices said they have reservations about allowing cameras in the courtroom.

( Also on POLITICO: SCOTUSblog denied press credentials)

“If the American people watched our proceedings from gavel to gavel, they would be educated,” Scalia said. But he said that most of the time the court is doing “real law,” or what he also calls “really dull stuff.” He said people would only watch 15-second segments that would be mischaracterized in sound bites on the news and misinform rather than educate the public.

Both also disagreed on the sources of freedom rooted in the American system of governance. Scalia said the structure of the government itself prevents people from obtaining too much power and that the U.S. legislature is something to be envied.

“I don’t think the rest of the world is regarding our legislature at the current moment as a model to be followed,” Ginsburg countered, saying the Bill of Rights is integral in maintaining the balance of powers and protecting freedoms.

Although their judicial ideologies often clash, and they disagreed many times during the chat on their interpretations of the law, both justices are still close friends.

“We agree on a whole lot of stuff. Ruth is bad only on the knee-jerk stuff,” Scalia said as Ginsburg and the audience laughed.

“I have never gotten angry at Ruth or any of my colleagues in the way that they voted in an opinion,” Scalia said. “Ruth and I disagree on the law all the time. But that has never had anything to do with our friendship.”