ipl-logo

Scalia Originalism

692 Words3 Pages

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was an originalist who has impacted the supreme court in a variety of pertinent case decisions such as King v. Burwell, whose ruling has upheld a key component to the Affordable Care Act. His recent death is unfortunate, but he leaves behind this impact on the court with his originalist perspective and an impact in those around him such as in his fellow Justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Scalia based his interpretation off of the theory of originalism. According to Scalia, originalist interpret the constitution as it originally was intended to mean when it was ratified in 1787. This view of the constitution conflicts with the the common interpretation of it today as a “living document,” that changes and adjust …show more content…

As opposed to Scalia’s originalist interpretation, Ginsburg believes the constitution evolves with society and should reflect contemporary society. Ginsburg states the constitution is to form a “more perfect union,” pertaining this idea to her constitutional philosophy by showing how the constitution most evolve in order to form a more perfect union. If the constitution stays stagnate and unchanged, there is no progression forward. She emphasize this idea by putting in perspective that “We the people” two centuries ago does not reflect who we the people are today. Originally this reflected the white, elite, land-owning men and now this statement reflects society as a whole. If the constitution were not to evolve with society, this idea of who “we” represents would have never changed. Despite their conflicting views, Scalia and Ginsburg has a thriving friendship. Scalia would attempt to “put-down” any view that opposed his, including Ginsburg’s. However, when asked how she feels about these put-downs, Ginsburg states his opinion is not o be taken seriously or to heart. Scalia see’s all the supreme court justice’s as implausible if they disagree with him on a matter. Ginsburg see;s Scalia’s put-downs as a challenge to fight against. The true friendship they share is shown in how they can have such conflicting views in the courtroom, yet come together and always have a positive and respectable view of one

Show More
Related
1023 Words | 5 Pages

When people think of how government works, unless they’ve taken a government class, they usually think of Congress making laws and the President doing pretty much everything else. No one pays much attention to the Supreme Court unless there is a landmark case or something else to grab the news — like the recent death of Justice Antonin Scalia. But the Supreme Court does much more than you’d think regarding keeping the political machine running like a well-oiled … machine. Through not only interpretation of the law, but also judicial activism, the Supreme Court shows it can have as much influence over the laws of the land as either of the other branches of the federal government. In this paper, I will analyze the decision-making methods of the Court using the cases of Gideon v. Wainwright and Betts v. Brady.

Read More
362 Words | 2 Pages

In William Brennan’s view on the American Constitution he focused on human dignity to determine his interpretation. As he states in his essay, “But we are an aspiring people, a people with faith in progress. Our amended Constitution is the lodestar for our aspirations. Like every text worth reading, it is not crystalline.” (Brennan).

Read More
1349 Words | 6 Pages

The nomination process seemed like revenge from both parties. That is a sad reality since these decisions might have a long-term impact on American politics and daily life. The FRONTLINE documentary "Supreme Revenge" follows the Republican and Democratic parties' protracted struggle to dominate the Supreme Court. To provide light on the events that took place behind the scenes, the producer has included fragments from conversations with legal professionals, writers, journalists, and workers from Congress and the White House.

Read More
646 Words | 3 Pages

Travis Maguire JCC US History Marshall Court Project Essay November 6, 2017 Chief John Marshall of the United States Supreme Court had a large impact on American history. His influence on the United States established the great power that the Supreme Court held for the future.

Read More
1541 Words | 7 Pages

Textualism, as Antonin Scalia describes it, is inconsistent in its nature. While he first claims that a good textualist would never interpret the law with the legislator’s intent in mind, Scalia later violates his own convictions by allowing for corrections of Scrivener’s errors. In principle, correcting Scrivener’s errors requires the judge to think about what the original writer meant to say with the statute, not the literal meaning of the text. This may mean adding a single additional word to the statute, but something as deceptively simple as one word could have drastic effects on the meaning of the law. Therefore, Scalia cannot claim to account for Scrivener’s errors while also chastising methods of interpretation that consider what the

Read More
797 Words | 4 Pages

Sonia Sotomayor, the first Latina nominated for the Supreme Court, gave a speech to the Senate Judiciary Committee about her work experience as a judge and her outlook on education. Sotomayor speaks about her experinces as a judge, along with the hard work she put into her education that earned her scholarships into two Ivy League schools. Sotomayor’s purpose is to seek the support from the Senate Judiciary Committee by giving an image to show she is eligible to be in the Supreme Court. Sotomayor supports her purpose with her background story about her education and her occupations as a judge. Sotomayor uses rhetorical appeals and a grateful tone to persuade the committee she is an applicable candidate to be in the Supreme Court.

Read More
674 Words | 3 Pages

Justice Sotomayor’s first interests in the justice system began after she watched an episode of the show Perry Manson, in this particular episode the prosecutor had stated he did not mind loosing when a defendant turned out to be innocent. Justice Sotomayor then later said in an interview that she “made the quantum leap that if that was the prosecutors job the she wanted to be the person who made the decision to dismiss the

Read More
120 Words | 1 Pages

A Supreme Courts nominee’s job is to be confirmed. To do so, they must navigate a Congressional hearing. These confirmation hearings are less about the nominee 's jurisprudence/case history and more about turning the candidate into a two-dimensional character that is composed of political sound bites. Then, it is the applicant’s responsibility to perform the textbook responses artfully to appease their audience. When Michael Dorf wrote, “What is Sonia Sotomayor’s Judicial Philosophy” he brought the public’s attention to the “Confirmation Ground Rules,” Here, he spoke about the choreographed hearing process.

Read More
1396 Words | 6 Pages

ome may argue that Ellis is wrong, and that there is continuity between the American Revolution of 1776 and the Constitution. They may argue that the founding fathers did in fact, “bring forth a new nation” in 1776 which did not change much when the Constitution was ratified. This nation of sorts may be characterized by its disjointedness, and its unity in its desire to stay that way. As Ellis pointed out in the beginning of his book, the states “regarded themselves as mini-nations of their own.” This would be supported by the fact that in the last two Supreme Court cases detailed above, there was serious opposition from people who saw the Court’s decision as an encroachment on state’s rights.

Read More
1112 Words | 5 Pages

The Supreme Court priorities from the time period of 1790 to 1865 were establishing the Judiciary Act of 1789, which was instrumental in founding the Federal Court System. The framers believed that establishing a National Judiciary was an urgent and important task. After the installation of Chief Justice John Marshall who “used his dominance to strengthen the court 's position and advance the policies he favored” (Baum 20). However, in the decision of the landmark case of Marbury v. Madison in 1803 was an example of the power he exuded “in which the Court struck down a Federal statute for the first time” (Baum 20). This created some internal conflict between Marshall and President Thomas Jefferson, however Marshall was able to diffuse this with

Read More
349 Words | 2 Pages

According to the celebration of the Constitution Day, I have been able to hear the debate between Professor Ralph A. Rossum and Professor Bruce Allen Murphy about Scalia: The Jurisprudence and Legacy of an Originalist. Professor Rossum came first and talked about the composition in Constitution, some cases happening during recent years, and the ideas of Scalia. About the Constitution, he illustrates that law was not permanent, it involves documents relating to time. By discussing the significance of tax, structure, and historical analyses of establishing the Constitution, Scalia’s idea shows up that Justice will make their own mistakes based on their laws. Majority opinions cannot always be conceivable due to the jury.

Read More
1324 Words | 6 Pages

Justice Thurgood Marshall Response Justice Thurgood Marshall said in his “Reflections on the Bicentennial of the United States Constitution”, “I do not believe the meaning of the Constitution was forever ‘fixed’ at the Philadelphia Convention. Nor do I find the wisdom, foresight, and sense of justice exhibited by the framers particularly profound. To the contrary, the government they devised was defective from the start, requiring several amendments, a civil war, and momentous social transformation to attain the system of constitutional government and its respect for the individual freedoms and human rights, that we hold as fundamental as today” (Marshall). In this passage of his essay, Judge Marshall is critical of the government that is

Read More
738 Words | 3 Pages

The problem with all the methodologies is that they fail to follow through with judicial restraint. “Activism still characterizes many judicial decision, and originalist judges have been among the worst offenders. They may sincerely strive to discover and apply the Constitution’s original understanding, but somehow personal preferences and original understandings seemingly manage to converge” (Wilkinson, pg. 46). Originalism aims at requiring for the sole use of the United States Constitution as a basis for judgments and while many disagree, it has put a limit to judicial power. Judicial dependence on the US Constitution proves that their power is limited since they are not originators of the law and must use original text to appropriately dictate.

Read More
644 Words | 3 Pages

The Leonore Annenberg Institute for Civics video titled “Key Constitutional Concepts” explores the history of the creation of the United States Constitution in addition to key concepts crucial to the document. Two central themes explored in the video include the protection of personal rights and importance of checks and balances. The video strives to explain these concepts through Supreme Court cases Gideon v. Wainwright and Youngstown v. Sawyer. To begin, the video retraces the steps leading up to the Constitutional Convention in Virginia in 1787. It opens by explaining the conflict that led to the Revolutionary War and the fragility of the new nation.

Read More
637 Words | 3 Pages

There are different ways that judges can interpret the constitution like originalism which is the principle or belief that the original intent of an author should be adhered to in later interpretations of a work. The original intent theory, which holds the interpretation of a written constitution is consistent with what was meant by those who drafted and ratified it. This is currently a minority view among originalists. The original meaning theory, which is closely related to textualism, is the view that interpretation of a written constitution or law should be based on what reasonable persons living at the time of its adoption would have understood the ordinary meaning of the text to be. Justice Scalia was a staunch protector of free speech even though, interestingly enough Justice Scalia’s protectiveness of the First Amendment flowed more from his views on stare decisis and his respect for precedent, rather than his originalist approach to constitutional interpretation.

Read More

More about Scalia Originalism

Related Topics

Open Document