Make way for international law which they say is superior to the U.S. Constititution

Eugene Volokh has a great post defending Scalia and Thomas on their "judicial isolationism." It appears to some liberals, though not all, that judicial interpretations borrowing liberally from international law, whatever that is, would greatly improve American jurisprudence. I say this is a fantasy. The liberals say Thomas is not intellectually curious enough to accept the infinite wisdom of b.s. coming out of the Hague. I'm with Thomas who is a bigger thinker than most SC justices.

So let me get this straight. Justice Scalia won't cite international law because he is afraid of defending his views of originalism? Given that Justice Scalia has been touring around the country giving lectures defending his philosophy and engaging in extensive Q-and-A sessions, often before before quite hostile audiences, that seems a rather strange suggestion. The claim that Justice Thomas "has no intellectual curiosity" is just lame, offered (of course) with no evidence or explanation. Any one who has ever had a conversation with Justice Thomas would recognize the suggestion as absurd. You can agree or disagree with Thomas's deeply-held views, of course, but to interpret profound disagreement as lack of curiosity seems a bit out-of-bounds.