The History Book Club discussion

259 views
SUPREME COURT OF THE U.S. > #103 - ASSOCIATE JUSTICE ANTONIN SCALIA

Comments Showing 1-41 of 41 (41 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Alisa (new)

Alisa (mstaz) This thread is dedicated to the discussion of Justice Antonin Scalia (103) and all related subjects.

Biography
Antonin Scalia, arguably the Court's most colorful jurist today, defies simple characterization. Indeed, the often controversial and combative justice draws out a wide range of sentiments from his peers and the public. Certainly, no one denies his immense legal brilliance and intellectual abilities. A Supreme Court observer once noted that if the mind were muscle and Court sessions were televised, Scalia would be the Arnold Schwartzenegger of American jurisprudence. Scalia also fills the role of the strong man. His confrontational style has startled many attorneys who have appeared before him. One litigator even described his action as those of a big cat batting around a ball of yarn. Scalia adds a dynamic personality to the Court. An author of recent study on the Court's conservative shift quipped that on a bench lined with solemn gray figures who often sat as silently as pigeons on a railing, Scalia stood out like a talking parrot. Scalia's own statements hint at his penetrating manner. When a reporter once commented favorably about Scalia's tuxedo, the ever-loquacious justice responded: "Ah yes, esteemed jurist by day, man about town by night." However, Scalia expresses nothing but humility about his job as a justice. At a conference before a crowd of law students, he admitted that he felt no sense of power whatsoever from his position. Instead, he agonized that his duty commonly forced him to end up doing things that: "I don't want to do."

Although many have noted his charms, Scalia's outspoken advocacy has alienated and at times offended some of his colleagues. Once, after a long tirade concluding that affirmative action constituted the most evil fruit of a fundamentally bad seed, a slightly offended Sandra Day O'Connor expressed her displeasure with the comment: "But, Nino, if it weren't for affirmative action, I wouldn't be here." Scalia's habit of using rhetorical extremes--for example, labeling a colleague's refusal to agree with him as "perverse" and "irrational"--has also hurt his relations with fellow justices. These anecdotes serve to form a portrait of this remarkable justice. As Scalia's role changes from a spearhead to an anchor in the moderating Court, the ever- unpredictable justice continues to amuse, astonish, satisfy, and frighten many Court watchers.

Antonin Scalia was born on March 11, 1936, in Trenton, New Jersey, as the only child of Eugene and Catherine Scalia. A second generation American, Scalia grew up with a strong Italian heritage explained by his father's foreign birth and his mother's immigrant upbringing. His father worked as a professor of Romance languages and his mother taught school. When young Nino was five, his father accepted a job at Brooklyn College and moved the family to Queens, New York.

Called "Nino" by friends and family, Scalia first attended public school in Queens. He later enrolled in St. Francis Xavier, a military prep school in Manhattan, where his intellect and work resulted in a first place graduation. Scalia's academic success continued at Georgetown University where he completed his undergraduate studies and received an A.B. summa cum laude in history. Scalia also graduated from Georgetown as class valedictorian. Scalia went on to Harvard Law School. He served as editor of the Harvard Law Review and graduated magna cum laude. After graduation, Scalia traveled in Europe for a year as part of his Sheldon Fellowship from Harvard. He met and became engaged to Maureen McCarthy, a student at nearby Radcliffe College, during his law school years. They married in 1960 and have nine children. They share a strong mutual faith in Catholicism.

After a brief stint working with commercial law, Scalia decided to teach law at the University of Virginia. After four years at Virginia, Scalia left teaching to pursue a career in government service. He started first as a general counsel for the Office of Telecommunication Policy under the Nixon administration. He successfully negotiated a major agreement between industry leaders to organize the growth of cable television. Between 1972 and 1974, Scalia chaired the Administrative Conference of the United States which studied ways to improve the efficiency of governmental processes. Richard Nixon nominated Scalia to head the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel just before the Watergate scandal forced Nixon to resign. President Ford assigned Scalia the task of determining legal ownership of the famous Nixon tapes and documents. Scalia decided in favor of Nixon, a reflection of his deep respect for the executive branch, though the Supreme Court soon ruled unanimously against this conclusion.

When President Jimmy Carter entered the White House in 1977, Scalia left government service to work as a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think-tank in Washington D.C. Scalia also taught law briefly at the Georgetown University Law Center before moving to Chicago to teach at the University of Chicago Law School. His family had grown so considerably by then that Scalia had to buy a former fraternity house to accommodate them. He stayed in Chicago between 1977 and 1982, leaving once only briefly to teach at Stanford. Although he made good impressions among his academic peers, he did not dazzle anyone in his scholarly efforts. Some colleagues observed that Scalia's heart seemed set on active politics rather than academic law.

Scalia served a brief period between 1981 and 1982 as the chairman of the American Bar Association's section on administrative law and the Conference of Section Chairs. He soon received another chance to return to public service. Reagan appointed him to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Washington D.C. in 1982 where Scalia developed his reputation for following judicial restraint and limited interpretation. His colleagues viewed him favorably and remembered him mostly for his constant willingness to engage in dialogue over matters of law.

In 1986, President Reagan promoted William H. Rehnquist to the position of chief justice in the wake of the retirement of Warren Burger. To fill the vacancy created by Rehnquist's promotion, Reagan nominated Scalia to the Supreme Court. The political focus on Rehnquist's nomination drew all the attention away from Scalia. Thus, even though Scalia had a much more conservative record than Rehnquist, ironically Scalia's nomination passed unanimously and virtually uncriticized. Scalia took the oaths of office, becoming the youngest justice on the Court. His staunch conservatism and obvious intellect excited many conservative advocates who saw much promise in his confirmation.

Scalia's pursuit of strict interpretation, judicial restraint, and bright-line distinctions in the law has led him to surprising votes in his years on the bench. He has puzzled or pleased many conservatives and liberals by voting consistently in favor of free speech. Scalia provided the critical fifth vote, much to the dismay of conservative activists, in striking down a Texas flag- burning prohibition. He also ruled that a St. Paul, Minnesota, prohibition against hate crimes violated freedom of speech. On the issue of reproductive rights, Scalia has labored mightily to strike down Roe v. Wade (1973). He has consistently rejected any notion of a right to abortion under the Constitution, arguing always that such matters constituted political decisions best decided by the popular branches of government.

Scalia's future is secure yet uncertain. Many believe that the moderation of the Court in recent years through the nominations of President Clinton will increasingly paint Scalia into an extreme intellectual corner. His confrontational and argumentative style may also detach him further from the mainstream of the Court. However, regardless of his future role and position on the ever-changing Court, Scalia's legal genius and rhetorical powers will likely ensure that his voice and vision, if not always supported, will continue to be heard.

source: The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 06 November 2011.




Personal Information
Born
Wednesday, March 11, 1936

Childhood Location
New Jersey

Childhood Surroundings
New Jersey

Religion
Roman Catholic

Ethnicity
Italian

Father
Eugene Scalia

Father's Occupation
Professor

Mother
Catherine Panaro

Family Status
Middle

Position
Associate Justice

Seat
10

Nominated By
Reagan

Commissioned on
Wednesday, September 24, 1986

Sworn In
Thursday, September 25, 1986

Length of Service
25 years, 1 month, 11 days

Home
Virginia


message 2: by Alisa (new)

Alisa (mstaz) Related books:

American Original The Life and Constitution of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia by Joan Biskupic by Joan Biskupic Joan Biskupic
The first full-scale biography of the Supreme Court’s most provocative—and influential—justice

If the U.S. Supreme Court teaches us anything, it is that almost everything is open to interpretation. Almost. But what’s inarguable is that, while the Court has witnessed a succession of larger-than-life jurists in its two-hundred-year-plus history, it has never seen the likes of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

Combative yet captivating, infuriating yet charming, the outspoken jurist remains a source of curiosity to observers across the political spectrum and on both sides of the ideological divide. And after nearly a quarter century on the bench, Scalia may be at the apex of his power. Agree with him or not, Scalia is “the justice who has had the most important impact over the years on how we think and talk about the law,” as the Harvard law dean Elena Kagan, now U.S. Solicitor General, once put it.

Scalia electrifies audiences: to hear him speak is to remember him; to read his writing is to find his phrases permanently affixed in one’s mind. But for all his public grandstanding, Scalia has managed to elude biographers—until now. In American Original: The Life and Constitution of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, the veteran Washington journalist Joan Biskupic presents for the first time a detailed portrait of this complicated figure and provides a comprehensive narrative that will engage Scalia’s adherents and critics alike. Drawing on her long tenure covering the Court, and on unprecedented access to the justice, Biskupic delves into the circumstances of his rise and the formation of his rigorous approach to the bench. Beginning with the influence of Scalia’s childhood in a first-generation Italian American home, American Original takes us through his formative years, his role in the Nixon-Ford administrations, and his trajectory through the Reagan revolution. Biskupic’s careful reporting culminates with the tumult of the contemporary Supreme Court—where it was and where it’s going, with Scalia helping to lead the charge.

Even as Democrats control the current executive and legislative branches, the judicial branch remains rooted in conservatism. President Obama will likely appoint several new justices to the Court—but it could be years before those appointees change the tenor of the law. With his keen mind, authoritarian bent, and contentious rhetorical style, Scalia is a distinct and persuasive presence, and his tenure is far from over. This new book shows us the man in power: his world, his journey, and the far-reaching consequences of the transformed legal landscape.

Scalia Dissents Writings of the Supreme Court's Wittiest, Most Outspoken Justice by Antonin Scalia by Antonin Scalia Antonin Scalia and Kevin Ring
Attorney Kevin Ring has assembled Justice Antonin Scalia's most scathing, most poignant, and most accessible opinions to date. Specific rulings and speeches are explained as Ring invites readers into the judicial world.


message 3: by Alisa (new)

Alisa (mstaz) Another book:

21 Supreme Court Issues Facing America The Scalia Model for a Conservative Court, Includes Samuel Alito on the Issues by Steve Elliott by Steve Elliott
Why is the Left so frightened of Judge Alito? Steve Elliot and Grassfire.org has the answer. In fact, Elliot has identified 21 key issues that are threatening the Left, and we've put them all in our exclusive 200+ page book 21 Supreme Court Issues Facing America. Inside you'll quickly discover why the Left is so afraid of judicial conservatives like Judge Alito.


Elliot has identified 21 vital issues that the Left has been using to undermine our nation, including judicial tyranny, the secular mandate, abortion, the welfare state, the homosexual agenda and much more. Using what we call the "Scalia model," 21 Issues provides a profile of how judicial conservatives can restore order to our courts.


message 4: by Alisa (new)

Alisa (mstaz) The Justice has a new book recently released:

Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts
Reading Law The Interpretation of Legal Texts by Antonin Scalia by Antonin Scalia Antonin Scalia

Synopsis
In this groundbreaking book, Scalia and Garner systematically explain all the most important principles of constitutional, statutory, and contractual interpretation in an engaging and informative style - with hundreds of illustrations from actual cases. Is a burrito a sandwich? Is a corporation entitled to personal privacy? If you trade a gun for drugs, are you "using a gun" in a drug transaction? The authors grapple with these and dozens of equally curious questions while explaining the most principled, lucid, and reliable techniques for deriving meaning from authoritative texts. Meanwhile, the book takes up some of the most controversial issues in modern jurisprudence. The authors write with a well-argued point of view that is definitive yet nuanced, straightforward yet sophisticated.


message 5: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Oct 20, 2012 07:10AM) (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
Elena Kagan and Scalia like to hunt together - who knew?



Elena Kagan Says She Likes To Hunt With Antonin Scalia

Source: The Huffington Post

KNOXVILLE, Tenn. -- Supreme Court Justices Elena Kagan and Antonin Scalia are ideological opposites, yet they share a pastime. They like to hunt together.

Kagan amused an audience Friday at the University of Tennessee College of Law in Knoxville with stories of how the conservative Scalia taught her to shoot fowl.

She said Scalia told her in the spring, "It's time to move on to the big game."

She said the two will go hunting in Wyoming this weekend and she hopes to bag an antelope.

Kagan, who was nominated by President Barack Obama and joined the court in 2010, expressed thanks to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor for blazing a trail for the women who followed them.

On the site - there is also a video of Scalia on why the Supreme Court is not political

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10...


message 6: by Alisa (new)

Alisa (mstaz) I seem to recall seeing other mentions of Scalia as someone who socializes frequently with his colleagues. Is it Justice O'Connor or Justice Ginsburg (or both) who share his love of opera and I think actually go to the opera together. It is all so unexpected from the outside perspective on who they are, or at least our expectations of what they are like in their daily lives.


message 7: by Peter (new)

Peter Flom Justice Kagan Please don't go hunting with Dick Cheney. Thank you.


message 8: by Alisa (new)

Alisa (mstaz) Peter that is hilarious!! Yeah, we don't want THAT to happen!


message 9: by Alisa (new)

Alisa (mstaz) Justice Scalia in the news ~

Scalia: Constitution Is 'Dead, Dead, Dead'
The Huffington Post
By Chris Gentilviso


Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is convinced that the supreme law of the land is losing its luster.

Appearing Monday evening at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas, Scalia dismissed the modern clout of the U.S. Constitution, casting it as outdated.

“It’s not a living document," he said, according to the Dallas Morning News. "It’s dead, dead, dead."

This is not the first instance of Scalia expressing thoughts of this nature. Back in December, he appeared at Princeton University in New Jersey, echoing similar doubts about the "living" nature of the document.

"The fairest reading of the text is what the law means," he said during that appearance.

Back in February 2009, however, Scalia spoke at a Stanford University Hoover Institution talk, classifying the document as a "morphing" piece of writing. In turn, the Supreme Court holds the power to decide how that evolution is interpreted.

"The Constitution changes from decade to decade to comport with -- and this is a phrase we use in our 8th Amendment jurisprudence, we the court does -- to comport with 'the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.'"

source (article contains link to video): http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01...


message 10: by Bryan (new)

Bryan Craig Interesting, would he vote to write a new one?!


message 11: by Alisa (new)

Alisa (mstaz) Right? I thought this was so bizarre. If he means to say interpretation should not change with the times that is one thing. But to declare it 'dead, dead, dead' seems to imply it has no value. I don't get it.


message 12: by Bryan (new)

Bryan Craig Maybe he is following the Jefferson ideal of the laws belong only to the living...write a new constitution for every generation.


message 13: by Alisa (new)

Alisa (mstaz) There's a thought, although even TJ understood the value of being practical.


message 14: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
I am beginning to think he is either losing it or likes to hear himself pontificate. He seems to be becoming more and more on the edge of prudent judicial decorum and speech. He likes to push the envelope.


message 15: by Peter (new)

Peter Flom I think he surely likes to hear himself pontificate. He may be losing it as well


message 16: by Alisa (new)

Alisa (mstaz) He has a way of getting attention, that's for sure.


message 17: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
A very complex individual. I often wonder about both him and Clarence. One talks so much and the other buddy says so little.


message 18: by Jerome, Assisting Moderator - Upcoming Books and Releases (last edited Oct 04, 2017 02:35PM) (new)

Jerome | 4287 comments Mod
Scalia: A Court of One

Scalia A Court of One by Bruce Allen Murphy by Bruce Allen Murphy (no photo)

Synopsis:

An authoritative, deeply researched biography of the most controversial and outspoken Supreme Court justice of our time and how he chose to be “right” rather than influential.

Antonin Scalia knew only success in the first fifty years of his life. His sterling academic and legal credentials led to his nomination by President Ronald Reagan to the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit in 1982. In four short years there, he successfully outmaneuvered the more senior Robert Bork to be appointed to the Supreme Court in 1986.

Scalia’s evident legal brilliance and personal magnetism led everyone to predict he would unite a new conservative majority under Chief Justice William Rehnquist and change American law in the process. Instead he became a Court of One. Rather than bringing the conservatives together, Scalia drove them apart. He attacked and alienated his more moderate colleagues Sandra Day O’Connor, then David Souter, and finally Anthony Kennedy. Scalia prevented the conservative majority from coalescing for nearly two decades.

Scalia: A Court of One is the compelling story of one of the most polarizing figures ever to serve on the nation’s highest court. It provides an insightful analysis of Scalia’s role on a Court that, like him, has moved well to the political right, losing public support and ignoring public criticism. To the delight of his substantial conservative following, Scalia’s “originalism” theory has become the litmus test for analyzing, if not always deciding, cases. But Bruce Allen Murphy shows that Scalia’s judicial conservatism is informed as much by his highly traditional Catholicism, mixed with his political partisanship, as by his reading of the Constitution. Murphy also brilliantly analyzes Scalia’s role in major court decisions since the mid-1980s and scrutinizes the ethical controversies that have dogged Scalia in recent years. A Court of One is a fascinating examination of one outspoken justice’s decision not to play internal Court politics, leaving him frequently in dissent, but instead to play for history, seeking to etch his originalism philosophy into American law.


message 19: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
Thank you Jerome


message 20: by Peter (new)

Peter Flom Jerome wrote: "Scalia: A Court of One

Scalia A Court of One by Bruce Allen Murphy by Bruce Allen Murphy (no photo)

Synopsis:

An authoritative, deeply researched biography of the most controvers..."


He is the most activist justice of modern times and a deeply evil man (just my opinion, on the latter).


message 21: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
There are a lot of folks who share your views. I see him as being an activist and a proponent of the far right. Many of his views of out of step even with Roberts.


message 22: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
About Justice Scalia - his biography on Fora TV:

Antonin Scalia

Antonin Scalia, Associate Justice, was born in Trenton, New Jersey, March 11, 1936. He received his A.B. from Georgetown University and the University of Fribourg, Switzerland, and his LL.B. from Harvard Law School, and was a Sheldon Fellow of Harvard University from 1960-1961.

He was in private practice in Cleveland, Ohio from 1961-1967, a Professor of Law at the University of Virginia from 1967-1971, and a Professor of Law at the University of Chicago from 1977-1982, and a Visiting Professor of Law at Georgetown University and Stanford University.

He was chairman of the American Bar Association's Section of Administrative Law, 1981-1982, and its Conference of Section Chairmen, 1982-1983. He served the federal government as General Counsel of the Office of Telecommunications Policy from 1971-1972, Chairman of the Administrative Conference of the United States from 1972-1974, and Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel from 1974-1977.

He was appointed Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 1982. President Reagan nominated him as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, and he took his seat September 26, 1986.


message 23: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
The globalization discussion focused on the following areas:

* Defining globalization
* Comparing State and International Law
* State Law and Globalization
* The Need for Unified Laws
* The Dangers of International Law
* Beneficial Uses of International Law
* Examples of Undemocratic International Law
* The Need for Specificity
* The Growing Power of the Courts
* The UN, NATO and International Law
* The Supreme Court and Democracy
* The International Limitations of US Law
* German Resistance to EU Law
* National Obligations to the UN
* Establishing Human Rights in the Middle East
* The Challenges of Defining "Democracy"
* Democracy and European Integration
* Catholicism, Natural Law and Globalization
* The Ramifications of the Bush vs. Gore Decision
* Democracy and the WTO

Definition of globalization

Process by which the experience of everyday life, marked by the diffusion of commodities and ideas, is becoming standardized around the world. Factors that have contributed to globalization include increasingly sophisticated communications and transportation technologies and services, mass migration and the movement of peoples, a level of economic activity that has outgrown national markets through industrial combinations and commercial groupings that cross national frontiers, and international agreements that reduce the cost of doing business in foreign countries. Globalization offers huge potential profits to companies and nations but has been complicated by widely differing expectations, standards of living, cultures and values, and legal systems as well as unexpected global cause-and-effect linkages. See also free trade.

Source: Globalization on britannica.com

Location:

Lloyd Cutler Lecture
Berlin, Germany

Event Date:
09.22.09

Summary of Lecture:

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia delivers a lecture on the clash between international and state law that is inherent in globalization. He explores historical precedents, and discusses the best and the worst ways of implementing international law.

Here is the link:

http://fora.tv/2009/09/22/Justice_Ant...

Source: Fora TV


message 24: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
It is sort of interesting listening to Scalia because he basically has stated that he considers the EU to be an example of undemocratic law.

There was also a quip early on about the Kyoto treaty (did not sound like he was for that either) not because he does not believe that the United States should not be working on global warming but because of the specificity or lack thereof of the language itself. At least that was the gist when he ran by that one. He does not like these treaties which are what he terms undemocratic.

He does agree to protocols and commissions where there is agreement by all the signatories to a specific code of conduct (which is democratic and specific).

He does not feel that international law is as faithful to democracy as state law.

He talks about capital punishment, freedom of speech, etc.

He believes in Natural law. There is indeed a right and wrong answer to many but not all questions of human rights. But there is nothing approaching universal agreement as to which questions are answered by natural law. No agreement as to what the answers might be. Moral questions should not be left to judges like human rights.

Scalia also believes the following:

State Law is in both theory and practice essential to any sort of globalization - commercial or cultural. An international law of one sort or another is also essential as a practical matter. Globalization is unlikely to occur in many areas without it. But a democratic society should be careful about the mode of international law it selects; by far the most desirable is a treaty dealing in great specificity with a particular subject; and by far the least desirable is a treaty expressing vague objectives whether economic or cultural and committed to the implementation by an international commission or international court.

I have to say that these sort of presentations show his razor sharp wit and repartee which can be painful I imagine if you are on the receiving end.


message 25: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
10 Things You Didn't Know About Antonin Scalia

10 interesting facts about the Supreme Court justice.

1. Antonin Scalia was born on March 11, 1936, in Trenton, N.J. His father, a Sicilian immigrant, was a professor of romance languages at Brooklyn College, and his mother, of Italian descent, was a public grade school teacher.

2. After graduating as valedictorian from Georgetown in 1957, he attended Harvard Law School, where he was editor of the Harvard Law Review and graduated magna cum laude.

3. Scalia and his wife, Maureen, married in 1960 and have nine children. During his nomination hearings, it was remarked that as a parent of nine, he had much experience in working with groups of nine.

4. Upon graduation from law school, Scalia practiced law with the firm Jones, Day, but left after six years, believing he was better suited to teaching law than practicing it. He taught administrative law at the University of Virginia and the University of Chicago; later, he was a visiting professor at Georgetown and Stanford. He moved into public service and held a variety of positions in the Nixon administration. After President Nixon resigned, President Ford assigned Scalia to determine the legal ownership of the Nixon tapes and documents. During a brief period between government service and his return to academia, Scalia served as scholar-in-residence at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank. In 1982, President Reagan appointed him to the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C.

5. Nominated by Reagan as an associate justice to replace William Rehnquist (who replaced Chief Justice Warren Burger upon Burger's retirement in 1986), Scalia was only 50 when his nomination hearings took place, making him the youngest justice on the Court at that time.

6. He dismayed many conservatives when he helped form the majority in a 5-4 decision in Texas v. Johnson, which struck down a Texas flag-burning prohibition.

7. Scalia was the first Italian-American to serve on the Supreme Court. During the opening remarks of his confirmation hearings, there was much ado over his ethnicity, prompting a chorus of "I'm Italian, too" remarks. This prompted Sen. Howell Heflin to remark, tongue-in-cheek, "I would be remiss if I did not mention the fact that my great-great-grandfather married a widow who was married first to an Italian-American," to which Scalia quipped, "Senator, I have been to Alabama several times, too."

8. An opera aficionado, Scalia, along with fellow Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, appeared as an extra in a 1994 production of Richard Strauss's Ariadne auf Naxos. Scalia appeared onstage for about an hour and a half during the second act in a costume first worn by Plácido Domingo during the world première of Goya in 1986.

9. While many have noted his charms and dry sense of humor, his outspokenness has at times alienated and offended his fellow justices. Scalia often uses rhetorical extremes, labeling, for example, a colleague who won't side with him as being "perverse" or "irrational." After a long discourse on affirmative action, in which he concluded that it was the most evil fruit of a bad seed, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, having taken umbrage at his words, expressed her displeasure by saying, "But, Nino, if it weren't for affirmative action, I wouldn't be here."

10. It can be scientifically proved that, at least while they're listening to cases, Scalia is the funniest of the justices. As recently as 2004, the official court reporter identifies the justices' remarks, questions, and comments; using the notation "(laughter)," it also notes any justice-induced jocularity. After mining the transcripts from the 2004-2005 session, Boston University law Prof. Jay Wexler determined that Scalia was the funniest justice by a landslide, "instigating 77 laughing episodes."

Sources:
Transcripts of Supreme Court nomination hearings
Associated Press
Encyclopedia of World Biography
Oyez

See video:

http://www.usnews.com/news/national/a...


message 26: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
Here is another one:

9 Things You Probably Didn't Know About Antonin Scalia

ALEKSI TZATZEV

SEP. 22, 2012, 11:52 AM

http://www.businessinsider.com/justic...#


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/justic...


message 27: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Feb 02, 2015 10:53AM) (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
Justice Antonin Scalia on issues facing SCOTUS and the country
Written by Chris Wallace / Published July 29, 2012 / Fox News Sunday


Special Guests: Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia

Recent rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court on health care reform and immigration demonstrated once again what a central role the court plays in our government. The justices rarely do interviews or talk outside of the court about how they reach their decisions. But in a new book called "Reading the Law: The Interpretation of Legal Text," Justice Antonin Scalia, longest serving member of the court, as well as law professor Robert Garner, explain what they believe is the right way to decide cases.

And we are delighted Justice Scalia has agreed to join us today to talk about it.

Justice, welcome to "Fox News Sunday".

There is a transcript and a video showing the interview.

See Video and article: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/fox-new...

Reading Law The Interpretation of Legal Texts by Antonin Scalia by Antonin Scalia Antonin Scalia


message 28: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
In the video above - Scalia discusses originalism sort of subspecies textualism in judging cases.

WALLACE: You -- in your book, you explain your approach to judging, which is called textualism or originalism. What exactly is that?

SCALIA: Originalism is sort of subspecies of textualism. Textualism means you are governed by the text. That's the only thing that is relevant to your decision, not whether the outcome is desirable, not whether legislative history says this or that. But the text of the statute.

Originalism says that when you consult the text, you give it the meaning it had when it was adopted, not some later modern meaning.


message 29: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
Same video shown in message 27:

Here Scalia talks about the Constitution and originalism/textualism in practice and also talks about purposivism.

WALLACE: So, if it was the Constitution written in the 18th century, you try to find what those words meant in the 18th century.

SCALIA: Exactly, the best example being the death penalty. I've sat with three colleagues who thought it was unconstitutional, but it's absolutely clear that the American people never voted to proscribe the death penalty. They adopted a cruel and unusual punishment clause at the time when every state had the death penalty and every state continued to have it. Nobody thought that the Eighth Amendment prohibited it.

WALLACE: All right. You criticize and this gets to, as you say, some of your colleagues, another approach using a word I have to admit that I did not know existed prior to reading your book -- purposivism. Did I pronounce that correctly?

SCALIA: Yes, you did. It's a nice long word. I didn't make it up.

WALLACE: What does it mean?

SCALIA: [INAUDIBLE] What it means is -- and it's probably the most popular of form of interpretation in recent times. It means consulting the purpose of the statute and deciding the case on the basis of what will further the purpose. Now, textualists consult purpose as well, but only the purpose that is apparent in the very text.

I have to give you an example or you will not understand the difference. Let's assume a statute which provides that the winning party in litigation will obtain attorney's fees.

The issue is whether that includes the fees paid to expert witnesses which can, you know, amount to thousands of dollars. The purpose of this would be inclined to approach that by saying, you know, what's the purpose of the statute? The purpose is to make the plaintiff whole, so that the money he receives for winning the case is money he can keep and he doesn't have to spend half of it on expert witness. The textualist would not say -- would not say that. He would say what -- what is the understood meaning of attorney's fees. And, in fact, it was never thought to include expert witness fees.

WALLACE: All right. In a couple of years ago, one of your colleagues, who I think you would say is on the other side of the judicial divide, Justice Stephen Breyer on the show, and he said it is impossible to apply the law as it was written. Take a look.


message 30: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Feb 02, 2015 11:12AM) (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
Same video discussion and transcript shown in message 27: (same video - his views on Affordable Care Act)

STEPHEN BREYER, U.S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE: The Founders didn't know that commerce included airplanes. They didn't know about the Internet, or even television.

And so the difficult job in open cases where there is no clear answer is to take those values in this document which all Americans hold, which do not change. And to apply them to a world that is ever changing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: Is Justice Breyer wrong?

SCALIA: Yes. Yes, that's -- that's a common and totally erroneous description of what originalism means. What originalism means is that you give the Constitution the meaning that it had with respect to those phenomena that were in existence at the time, say, the death penalty.

WALLACE: But there are a lot of phenomena that aren't existence at the time.

(CROSSTALK)

SCALIA: It weren't for those. Of course, you have to decide what the meaning ought to be. But the criterion for deciding what the meaning today ought to be is what was the understood meaning as applied to criteria at the time. For example in the death penalty. When the electric chair comes in, it's a new phenomenon. What did the framers think of the electric chair? Who knows? There wasn't any electric chair. But they had the death penalty and they did impose death by hanging.

So, what the originalist would say is, is the electric chair more cruel and unusual than hanging was? And of course it isn't because it was adopted to be less cruel. And the same thing with lethal injection.

WALLACE: OK. In your book you lay out, beyond this general argument, 57 specific canons, principles for judging.

SCALIA: Right.

WALLACE: Here is number 38. You have 57. It is like the Heinz Varieties. "A statute should be interpreted in a way that avoids placing its constitutionality in doubt." In other words, try to find a way to avoid judicial conflict with the legislature, canon number 38.

SCALIA: Right.

WALLACE: But you voted to strike down ObamaCare which the legislature, in this case the Congress, was -- debated for a year. And in your dissent, you criticized Chief Justice Roberts for following cannon 38, by finding that --

SCALIA: No.

WALLACE: You are shaking your head -- for finding that the individual mandate is a tax. Didn't Justice Roberts do exactly what you say a good judge should do, try to find a way to avoid striking down the law?

SCALIA: I don't think so. If you read the rest of the section, you would say, to find a way to find a meaning that the language will bear that will uphold the constitutionality. You don't interpret a penalty to be a pig. It can't be a pig. And what my dissent said in the --

WALLACE: Affordable Care Act.

SCALIA: -- Affordable Care Act was simply that there is no way to regard this penalty as a tax. It simply doesn't bear that meaning. You cannot give -- in order to save the constitutionality, you cannot give the text a meaning it will not bear.


message 31: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
Same video discussion and transcript shown in message 27: (his views on gun control)


message 32: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Mar 01, 2015 04:58PM) (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
Justice Antonin Scalia Speech on Constitutional Interpretation (03/14/05)

On Audible:

U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia makes remarks on the topic of "Constitutional Interpretation." He speaks at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, DC.

He feels that you should read and interpret the Constitution exactly as it was supposed to be interpreted at the time the Constitution was written.

Justice Scalia explains the two competing modes of interpreting the Constitution, though it's quite clear on which side he comes out. The debate is about "originalism" vs. the flexible "living constitution," even if judicial liberals would not call it that.

You cannot mold the constitution to what you want it to be according to Scalia.

He believes that he is an originalist and this mode of interpretation has dominated court thinking until just the past 50 years. He is not a strict constructionist he states.

Originalism used to be the orthodoxy. Prior to the last 50 years ago and prior to the living constitution, the judges did their distortions the old fashioned way. He thinks we are in the era of the evolving constitution.

This can be a free listen folks: (on amazon and audible)

Audible Audio Edition
Listening Length: 57 minutes
Program Type: Audiobook
Version: Unabridged
Publisher: C-SPAN
Audible.com Release Date: March 22, 2005
Language: English
ASIN: B00JHNV5RI


message 33: by Francie (new)

Francie Grice Then Comes Marriage: United States v. Windsor and the Defeat of DOMA

Then Comes Marriage United States v. Windsor and the Defeat of DOMA by Roberta Kaplan by Roberta Kaplan Roberta Kaplan

Synopsis:

Renowned litigator Roberta Kaplan knew from the beginning that it was the perfect case to bring down the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Edie Windsor and Thea Spyer had been together as a couple, in sickness and in health, for more than forty years—enduring society’s homophobia as well as Spyer’s near total paralysis from multiple sclerosis. Although the couple was finally able to marry, when Spyer died the federal government refused to recognize their marriage, forcing Windsor to pay a huge estate tax bill.

In this gripping, definitive account of one of our nation’s most significant civil rights victories, Kaplan describes meeting Windsor and their journey together to defeat DOMA. She shares the behind-the-scenes highs and lows, the excitement and the worries, and provides intriguing insights into her historic argument before the Supreme Court. A critical and previously untold part of the narrative is Kaplan’s own personal story, including her struggle for self-acceptance in order to create a loving family of her own.

Then Comes Marriage tells this quintessentially American story with honesty, humor, and heart. It is the momentous yet intimate account of a thrilling victory for equality under the law for all Americans, gay or straight.


message 34: by Francie (new)

Francie Grice Scalia: A Court of One

Scalia A Court of One by Bruce Allen Murphy by Bruce Allen Murphy (no photo)

Synopsis:

An authoritative, deeply researched biography of the most controversial and outspoken Supreme Court justice of our time and how he chose to be “right” rather than influential.

Antonin Scalia knew only success in the first fifty years of his life. His sterling academic and legal credentials led to his nomination by President Ronald Reagan to the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit in 1982. In four short years there, he successfully outmaneuvered the more senior Robert Bork to be appointed to the Supreme Court in 1986.

Scalia’s evident legal brilliance and personal magnetism led everyone to predict he would unite a new conservative majority under Chief Justice William Rehnquist and change American law in the process. Instead he became a Court of One. Rather than bringing the conservatives together, Scalia drove them apart. He attacked and alienated his more moderate colleagues Sandra Day O’Connor, then David Souter, and finally Anthony Kennedy. Scalia prevented the conservative majority from coalescing for nearly two decades.

Scalia: A Court of One is the compelling story of one of the most polarizing figures ever to serve on the nation’s highest court. It provides an insightful analysis of Scalia’s role on a Court that, like him, has moved well to the political right, losing public support and ignoring public criticism. To the delight of his substantial conservative following, Scalia’s “originalism” theory has become the litmus test for analyzing, if not always deciding, cases. But Bruce Allen Murphy shows that Scalia’s judicial conservatism is informed as much by his highly traditional Catholicism, mixed with his political partisanship, as by his reading of the Constitution. Murphy also brilliantly analyzes Scalia’s role in major court decisions since the mid-1980s and scrutinizes the ethical controversies that have dogged Scalia in recent years. A Court of One is a fascinating examination of one outspoken justice’s decision not to play internal Court politics, leaving him frequently in dissent, but instead to play for history, seeking to etch his originalism philosophy into American law.


message 35: by Lorna, Assisting Moderator (T) - SCOTUS - Civil Rights (new)

Lorna | 1864 comments Mod
The Life and Legacy of Justice Antonin Scalia February 18, 2016

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia passed away on February 13. In his nearly thirty years on the Court, Justice Scalia was a tireless advocate for textualist and originalist interpretation. He was, in short, a passionate visionary who transformed the terms of constitutional debate.

Two of Justice Scalia’s former Supreme Court clerks—and legal giants in their own right—joined We the People to swap stories and reflect on the Justice’s constitutional legacy.

Lawrence Lessig is the Roy L. Furman Professor of Law and Leadership at Harvard Law School.Steven Calabresi is the Clayton J. and Henry R. Barber Professor of Law at the Northwestern Pritzker School of Law.


Nelson Shanks, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States




Other:
Link to the National Constitution Center: http://s36.podbean.com/pb/ac30d473ffc...

Discussion Topics:

1. Discuss the role that Justice Antonin Scalia played in the founding of the Federalist Society and the effect that it had on his career.

2. Discuss Justice Scalia's respect and admiration for Justice Brennan and their passion for the vision of the Constitution.

3. Discuss the views discussed of Justice Scalia's opinion in Bush v. Gore and the "one person, one vote" argument.

Source(s): National Constitution Center, Oyez


message 36: by Jerome, Assisting Moderator - Upcoming Books and Releases (new)

Jerome | 4287 comments Mod
An upcoming book:
Release date: March 20, 2018

The Justice of Contradictions: Antonin Scalia and the Politics of Disruption

The Justice of Contradictions Antonin Scalia and the Politics of Disruption by Richard L. Hasen by Richard L. Hasen (no photo)

Synopsis:

Engaging but caustic and openly ideological, Antonin Scalia was among the most influential justices ever to serve on the United States Supreme Court. In this fascinating new book, legal scholar Richard L. Hasen assesses Scalia’s complex legacy as a conservative legal thinker and disruptive public intellectual.

The left saw Scalia as an unscrupulous foe who amplified his judicial role with scathing dissents and outrageous public comments. The right viewed him as a rare principled justice committed to neutral tools of constitutional and statutory interpretation. Hasen provides a more nuanced perspective, demonstrating how Scalia was crucial to reshaping jurisprudence on issues from abortion to gun rights to separation of powers. A jumble of contradictions, Scalia promised neutral tools to legitimize the Supreme Court, but his jurisprudence and confrontational style moved the Court to the right, alienated potential allies, and helped to delegitimize the institution he was trying to save.


message 37: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
Wonderful adds Lorna with a lot of info - Jerome thank you for your add


message 38: by Lorna, Assisting Moderator (T) - SCOTUS - Civil Rights (new)

Lorna | 1864 comments Mod
Trump's Supreme Court pick calls Antonin Scalia a 'role model' and a 'judicial hero'

By MANU RAJU and JOAN BISKUPIC August 13, 2018


At left, the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. At right, President Donald Trump's pick to be the next Supreme Court Justice, appeals court judge Brett Kavanaugh, who called Scalia, "an apostle of restraint and an apostle of engagement."

(CNN) President Donald Trump has extolled the late conservative icon Antonin Scalia, and so has his new nominee for the Supreme Court, Brett Kavanaugh.

In some of his most forceful speeches in recent years, Kavanaugh has referred to the conservative justice who served from 1986-2016 as a "role model" and a "hero."

Kavanaugh, a 53-year-old appeals court judge nominated to succeed the more moderate Justice Anthony Kennedy, has extensively praised Scalia, in one speech noting there are "many" examples of the conservative jurist influencing him. He has hailed his judicial philosophy as "simple but profound," one that he hoped would leave a long-lasting legacy.

"I loved the guy," Kavanaugh said at a conference in June 2016 at George Mason Law School, which has been named after Scalia. "To me, he was and remains a hero and a role model. He thought carefully about his principles. He articulated those principles. And he stood up for those principles. As a judge, he did not buckle to political or academic pressure from the right or the left."

A year later, Kavanaugh lavished similar praise on Scalia, delivering a keynote address at Notre Dame Law School and saying: "Justice Scalia was and remains a judicial hero and role model to many throughout America."

The confirmation of Kavanaugh -- a federal appeals court judge with more than 300 opinions to his name -- would almost certainly tilt the Supreme Court further to the right. He has been nominated to replace the long-time swing vote Kennedy, a 30-year veteran of the court who has voted in favor of LGBT rights, abortion and affirmative action.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is preparing to scrutinize Kavanaugh's public remarks and rulings while on the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, where he has sat since 2006, at his confirmation hearings, set to begin September 4. Kavanaugh earlier worked for President George W. Bush and for independent counsel Ken Starr as he investigated President Bill Clinton in the late 1990s.

Kavanaugh lauds 'an apostle of restraint'

In his 2016 address at George Mason, Kavanaugh expressed his belief that some of Scalia's dissenting opinions would one day become the law, including his dissent in a 1988 ruling upholding the constitutionality of an independent counsel and in a 2004 case where Scalia pushed for greater protections in certain circumstances for a US citizen being held as an enemy combatant.

At one point in the speech, Kavanaugh singled out two of Scalia's most controversial dissents, in cases upholding same-sex marriage and abortion rights, to show how the late justice argued against creating rights for individuals not spelled out in the Constitution. Kavanaugh did not express his own position on those hot-button cases.

Kavanaugh, who once served as a clerk to Kennedy, has showered some of his warmest praise on Scalia. He also has said that when he was a law student in the 1980s, the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist was his "first judicial hero."

Whether Kavanaugh would rule like Scalia across the board is debatable, but Kavanaugh's 2016 remarks suggest that Scalia's three decades on the Supreme Court have had a lasting impact on him.

"Justice Scalia was an apostle of restraint and an apostle of engagement," Kavanaugh said.

In his 2016 speech, Kavanaugh said that it is "my belief and hope" that the justice changed "statutory interpretation forever."

In interpreting statutes, Scalia argued that judges should focus on the text of a law and brush aside congressional floor statements and other artifacts of legislative history. He was an "originalist" on the Constitution, looking to the document's 18th Century meaning and rejecting the notion that it evolved with the times.

In one example of Scalia's influence on him, Kavanaugh highlighted the justice's 1989 vote to uphold the constitutional right to burn the American flag under the First Amendment.

"At the time, as a second year law student I despised his vote in the case," Kavanaugh said. "Today, I agree with it. That's one of my many personal examples of Justice Scalia's influence on me."

Scalia's opinions on abortion, same-sex marriage under scrutiny

A key point of focus at his September confirmation hearings will be how he views polarizing social issues, like abortion and gay rights. And in his George Mason speech, Kavanaugh highlighted two of Scalia's most controversial dissents on those topics, without either praising his opinions or raising concerns about them.

In 1992, Scalia dissented from a 5-4 ruling to uphold abortion rights in the case of Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. That decision reinforced the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade ruling that made abortion legal nationwide. In his heated dissent, Scalia declared that judges should not decide the issue, rather that it should be left to elected officials and the democratic process.

"We should get out of this area," he said in 1992, "where we have no right to be, and where we do neither ourselves nor the country any good by remaining."

In 2015, Scalia also dissented from the court's decision, Obergefell v. Hodges, declaring a right to same-sex marriage. In his dissent, Scalia called the ruling a "threat to American democracy."

Kavanaugh said in his 2016 speech that those two dissents are a sign of how Scalia believed that courts had "no legitimate role ... in creating new rights not spelled out in the Constitution."

"For Justice Scalia, it was not the court's job to improve on or update the Constitution to create new rights," Kavanaugh said. He added: "Put simply, he was deferential when the Constitution and statutes called for deference. He was not deferential when they did not."

In private meetings with senators, Kavanaugh has been careful in how he has addressed issues he may rule on, including abortion.

In an October 2017 case at the DC Circuit, Kavanaugh acknowledged that Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey are precedents that lower court judges like himself follow. Senators are likely to try to explore his views further, because while lower court judges are bound by Supreme Court precedent, the justices have the power to roll back and change precedent.

The White House would not comment when asked if Kavanaugh shared views similar to Scalia on abortion and same-sex marriage. But Helgi Walker, a former Kavanaugh colleague in the Bush White House who is now a partner at a Washington law firm, said Kavanaugh's comments about Scalia do not necessarily reflect Kavanaugh's own views.

"This is a speech paying tribute to the late, great Justice Scalia," Walker said.

Link to article: https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/13/politi...

Other:

The Justice of Contradictions Antonin Scalia and the Politics of Disruption by Richard L. Hasen by Richard L. Hasen (no photo)

Source: CNN


message 39: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
Very timely Lorna and what a lot of folks are concerned about


message 40: by Lorna, Assisting Moderator (T) - SCOTUS - Civil Rights (new)

Lorna | 1864 comments Mod
American Original: The Life and Constitution of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia

American Original The Life and Constitution of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia by Joan Biskupic by Joan Biskupic Joan Biskupic

Synopsis:

The first full-scale biography of the Supreme Court’s most provocative—and influential—justice

If the U.S. Supreme Court teaches us anything, it is that almost everything is open to interpretation. Almost. But what’s inarguable is that, while the Court has witnessed a succession of larger-than-life jurists in its two-hundred-year-plus history, it has never seen the likes of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

Combative yet captivating, infuriating yet charming, the outspoken jurist remains a source of curiosity to observers across the political spectrum and on both sides of the ideological divide. And after nearly a quarter century on the bench, Scalia may be at the apex of his power. Agree with him or not, Scalia is “the justice who has had the most important impact over the years on how we think and talk about the law,” as the Harvard law dean Elena Kagan, now U.S. Solicitor General, once put it.

Scalia electrifies audiences: to hear him speak is to remember him; to read his writing is to find his phrases permanently affixed in one’s mind. But for all his public grandstanding, Scalia has managed to elude biographers—until now. In American Original: The Life and Constitution of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, the veteran Washington journalist Joan Biskupic presents for the first time a detailed portrait of this complicated figure and provides a comprehensive narrative that will engage Scalia’s adherents and critics alike. Drawing on her long tenure covering the Court, and on unprecedented access to the justice, Biskupic delves into the circumstances of his rise and the formation of his rigorous approach to the bench. Beginning with the influence of Scalia’s childhood in a first-generation Italian American home, American Original takes us through his formative years, his role in the Nixon-Ford administrations, and his trajectory through the Reagan revolution. Biskupic’s careful reporting culminates with the tumult of the contemporary Supreme Court—where it was and where it’s going, with Scalia helping to lead the charge.

Even as Democrats control the current executive and legislative branches, the judicial branch remains rooted in conservatism. President Obama will likely appoint several new justices to the Court—but it could be years before those appointees change the tenor of the law. With his keen mind, authoritarian bent, and contentious rhetorical style, Scalia is a distinct and persuasive presence, and his tenure is far from over. This new book shows us the man in power: his world, his journey, and the far-reaching consequences of the transformed legal landscape.


message 41: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44168 comments Mod
Lorna, I will say a very big thank you for all of the adds for all of the threads today. Very helpful.


back to top