Politics and US Supreme Ct Panel with James Zirin Author "Supremely Partisan" at NYHIstoric Soc

Last night's program at the NY Historical Soc featured author/attorney James Zirin.  His new book "Supremely Partisan:  How Raw Politics Tips the Scales in the US Supreme Ct" is very prescient.  From what he was able to discuss, incredibly interesting.  The problem was the moderator, Philip Bobbitt, Prof of Jurisprudence at Columbia Univ & Dir of the Ctr on Nat'l Sec at Columbia Law School.  He monopolized the conversation.  The facilitator needed to tell Bobbitt to stop it!  Zirin made pithy points when permitted to answer.  Bobbitt was editorializing & giving lengthy readings from the  book.  I found Zirin fascinating & direct.  He answered Bobbitt's logquacious remarks with "That's nonsense," several times.  The prog dir promptly announced the talk would be an hour.  After 45 minutes the floor was opened to audience questions obtained taken from their turned in notecards.  I left - usually the Q&A's are quite annoying & self-indulgent (like Bobbitt.)  Regardless, here are highlights of what I gleaned from Mr Zirin:
1.  The Supreme Ct is the most important branch of govt depsite having no military power or access to funding because the Court is the basis of a lawful society
2.  Mitch McConnell was unlawful for not having put Obama's nominations before Congress - there is nothing in the Constitution that says "The people choose the Supreme Ct Justice, nonsense" - the Pres issues nominations & congress puts the candidate to a vote
3.  Scalia didn't like rulings with a 5 to 4 decision.  Scalia preferred to have rulings to be unanimous and thus assured.
4. The only Supreme Ct Justice to be impeached was during the presidencies of our founding fathers.
5.  With the number of "hot button" issues - it is nearly impossible to separate a Justice's religious, socio-economic & educational background.  The hot topics mentioned were:  gay marriage (Scalia was against) but believed it should be a federal ruling) abortion (Scalia was strongly opposed & would have likely overturned Roe v Wade) affirmative action and capital punishment (which Scalia strongly supported sighting his Catholicism.  However, after the current Pope spoke out against capital punishment Scalia justified it.
The discussion on what constitutes cruel & unusual punishment (terms in our Constitution) "allows for evolving standards of decencies."
I was not amused or convinced by Bobbitt's comments that 1 in 10 Americans are unable to name 1 Supreme Justice or that 1 in 3 people believe Judge Judy is a Supreme Ct Justice.  Bobbitt as moderator didn't do justice to Zirin's elevated discussion on Judicial Review, the Federalist Papers and compelling questions to pose to nominees.  However, I intend to read Zirin's book and boycott Bobbitt on future panels.