Statutory and constitutional interpretation Antonin Scalia

judge , mrs. scalia (left) , president reagan (right) watch chief justice warren burger swears william rehnquist in next chief justice, september 26, 1986.

scalia textualist in statutory interpretation, believing ordinary meaning of statute should govern. in 1998, scalia vociferously opposed idea of living constitution, or power of judiciary modify meaning of constitutional provisions adapt them changing times. scalia warned if 1 accepted constitutional standards should evolve maturing society, risk of assessing evolving standards is easy believe evolution has culminated in 1 s own views . compared constitution statutes contended not understood change meaning through time. constitutional amendments, such 1868 fourteenth amendment, according scalia, interpreted based on meaning @ time of ratification. scalia asked how approach justified result in 1954 case of brown v. board of education, held segregated schools unconstitutional , relied on fourteenth amendment result.

in interpreting statutes, scalia did not legislative history. in 2006 case of zedner v. united states, joined majority opinion written justice samuel alito—all except 1 paragraph of opinion, in alito cited legislative history. in concurring opinion in case, scalia noted, use of legislative history illegitimate , ill advised in interpretation of statute . dislike of legislative history may have been reason other justices have become more cautious in use. gregory maggs wrote in public interest law review in 1995 1990s, legislative history being cited in forty percent of supreme court cases involving interpretation of statutes , no case of era used legislative history essential reason outcome. maggs suggested,

with justice scalia breathing down necks of peeks congressional record or senate reports, other members of court may have concluded benefit of citing legislative history not outweigh costs. reason percentage of cases citing has decreased dramatically. no 1 likes unnecessary fight, not 1 formidable opponent justice scalia.

scalia described himself originalist, meaning interpreted united states constitution have been understood when adopted. according scalia in 2008, s did words mean people ratified bill of rights or ratified constitution . in 2006, before george w. bush appointees roberts , alito had had time make impact, rossum wrote scalia had failed win converts among conservative colleagues use of originalism, whereas roberts , alito, younger men originalist approach, admired scalia battling believed in.

in 2009 public conversation, justice stephen breyer questioned scalia, indicating ratified fourteenth amendment did not intend end school segregation. scalia called argument waving bloody shirt of brown , indicated have joined first justice harlan s solitary dissent in plessy v. ferguson, 1896 case brown overruled.

scalia s originalist approach came under attack critics, viewed cover see scalia s real intention: turn pivotal court decisions of 1960s , 70s reached warren , burger courts. ralph nader argued in 2008 scalia s originalist philosophy inconsistent justice s acceptance of extension of constitutional rights corporations when @ time of fourteenth amendment s ratification, corporations not commonly understood possess constitutional rights. nader s view preceded court s 2010 decision in citizens united v. federal election commission. scalia, in concurrence in case, traced understanding of rights of groups of individuals @ time of adoption of bill of rights. argument based on lack of exception groups such corporations in free speech guarantee in bill of rights , on several examples of corporate political speech time of adoption of bill of rights. professor thomas colby of george washington university national law center argued scalia s votes in establishment clause cases not stem originalist views conservative political convictions. scalia responded critics originalism has led him decisions deplores, upholding constitutionality of flag burning , according scalia protected first amendment.

the roberts court (october 2010 – february 2016). front row (left right): clarence thomas, antonin scalia (now deceased), john roberts (chief), anthony kennedy, ruth bader ginsburg. row (left right): sonia sotomayor, stephen g. breyer, samuel a. alito, elena kagan.

in 2009, after quarter century on court, scalia characterized victories damn few .

writing in jewish daily forward in 2009, j.j. goldberg described scalia intellectual anchor of court s conservative majority . scalia traveled nation s law schools, giving talks on law , democracy. appearances on college campuses standing room only. ginsburg indicated scalia in tune current generation of law students ... students put federalist society on resumes . john paul stevens, served throughout scalia s tenure until 2010 retirement, said of scalia s influence, s made huge difference. of constructive, of unfortunate . of 9 sitting justices, scalia subject of law review articles.