Now what?

In the short run, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's passing will transform the court, but his influence on the country will be deep. Much of that influence came from his dissents. They were colorful. They used obscure phrases like "argle-bargle" and "jiggery-pokery." They directly criticized other justices. They modified metaphors, as when he proclaimed that "this wolf comes as a wolf." Many have dismissed those dissents: They are said to have alienated other justices, demeaned the law and demonstrated Scalia's irrelevance.

That assessment is deeply mistaken. The public saw only one side of Scalia's work. We didn't see the draft dissents that succeeded — the dissents that never had to issue because they persuaded his colleagues and became majority opinions; or the changes other justices made to their opinions when Scalia convinced them of an error. I strongly suspect that they existed. That effect is one reason Scalia kept writing them.

Scalia's dissents also had an audience outside the court. The writing style that irritated and offended some people still draws readers to his opinions. And the first step to persuading other people is getting them to read you — a lesson that all professional writers know all too well.

Read more at The Chicago Tribune