ABC News investigator Brian Ross presents the dumbest attempt to provoke a scandal since his last excursion into the world of make-believe controversy. I know you will all be outraged at the findings of his latest hard-hitting report: When John Roberts was sworn in as chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, Justice Antonin Scalia was not there to hold his hand!

Given the breathless (EXCLUSIVE!) packaging of the report online, where would you think Scalia was instead?

A) Smoking crack

B) Attending a Klan rally

C) Cheating on his diet

If you guessed A, B or C, you guessed wrong. It was worse.

He was playing tennis at a Federalist Society retreat.

At the historic swearing-in of John Roberts as the 17th chief justice of the United States last September, every member of the Supreme Court, except Antonin Scalia, was in attendance. ABC News has learned that Scalia instead was on the tennis court at one of the country’s top resorts, the Ritz-Carlton hotel in Bachelor Gulch, Colo., during a trip to a legal seminar sponsored by the Federalist Society.
Not only did Scalia’s absence appear to be a snub of the new chief justice, but according to some legal ethics experts, it also raised questions about the propriety of what critics call judicial junkets.

The article quotes two legal ethics experts: NYU professor Stephen Gillers and Doug Kendall, director of Community Rights Counsel. They both criticize Scalia’s decision to accept a trip funded by the Federalist Society, which Ross describes as a “conservative activist group.” Ross doesn’t do his readers the favor, however, of informing them that Gillers has criticized Scalia before in the left-wing magazine The Nation, and that the Community Rights Counsel is a left-wing public interest law firm that receives major funding from George Soros. Neither is impartial toward either Scalia or the Federalist Society, but that is how each is presented.

More ridiculous, though, is the insinuation that the Federalist Society was trying to improperly influence Scalia by flying him out to speak at its seminar. Anyone familiar with the two knows that both share the same beliefs about the law. In addition, GMU law professor Ron Rotunda — Scalia’s lone defender quoted in the piece — pointed out that, “The organization doesn’t have litigation before the judge and is unlikely to have litigation before the judge.”

No matter. According to Ross, this is a “Supreme Ethics Problem.” He even has Scalia, who appears to be a lousy tennis player, “caught on tape!” But the only outrage I felt when I read the piece was toward ABC News for trying to manipulate me into being outraged.