Anyone who read Scalia's opinion in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White can see where he's coming from. The logic of the decision sanctions a transparent confirmation process for Supreme Court nominees. Here's one possibility.

The Chair and Ranking Member take turns holding up the name of an important Supreme Court decision written on a large piece of oaktag. The nominee is limited to one of four one-word reactions:

1. affirm
2. overrule
3. broaden
4. distinguish

In the ensuing round, each member asks the nominee to elaborate. In case of waffling, they are permitted to follow up..

This would end the element of surprise in this most Faustian branch of our federal government. I doubt the Framers would object.