Antonin Scalia, Associate Justice of the US Supreme Court, spoke to a group at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Jeffrey King transcribed the speech from tape, a diligence I certainly appreciate. And I have added his blog to my list.
Scalia calls himself an “originalist” rather than a “strict constructionist”, and I think that term fits much better. And he explains why he defines the two differently.
More important, he talks about what the Constitution is really about, and how we ended up where we are today with the Senate.
I think the very terminology suggests where we have arrived: at the point of selecting people to write a constitution, rather than people to give us the fair meaning of one that has been democratically adopted. And when that happens, when the Senate interrogates nominees to the Supreme Court, or to the lower courts, you know, “Judge so and so, do you think there is a right to this in the Constitution? You don’t?! Well my constituents’ think there ought to be, and I’m not going to appoint to the court someone who is not going to find that.” When we are in that mode, you realize, we have rendered the Constitution useless, because the Constitution will mean what the majority wants it to mean. The senators are representing the majority. And they will be selecting justices who will devise a constitution that the majority wants.
And that of course, deprives the Constitution of its principle utility. The Bill of Rights is devised to protect you and me against, who do you think? The majority. My most important function on the Supreme Court is to tell the majority to take a walk. And the notion that the justices ought to be selected because of the positions that they will take that are favored by the majority is a recipe for destruction of what we have had for two-hundred years.
He summed up the issue quite well, thank you.
It is precisely the point to be made. If you don’t like something, get the laws changed. Don’t go to court. The courts are supposed to be there to protect your rights, not to impose your desires on others. And if the majority impose their beliefs on you through law that infringes on your rights as guaranteed by the Constitution, the courts are supposed to strike down those laws.
It’s really a pretty simple concept.
The crux of all issues in the Senate at this time is abortion. The Democratic Party holds this issue as their most important rallying point. They will accept no nominee to the Supreme Court who is unwilling to state they will protect Roe v. Wade without question. And right now, they are unwilling to allow Dubya to put anyone onto the Court unless they are “moderate.” Read Scalia’s speech and see how he destroys the entire concept of “moderate judges.”