Download pfd

This small book promotes “statutory interpretation” of the Constitution. Scalia tells us that judges should resist the temptation to use legislative intent and legislative history when interpreting the law. He believes that it is incompatible with democratic government to allow the meaning of a statute to be determined by what judges think that lawmakers meant rather than by what they actually wrote. Proper interpretation is made by focusing on the law itself. Also, we should concentrate on the original meaning of the Constitution.

COMMENT

Despite what Scalia claims to be able to do, no one can interpret the law apart from the biases they have accumulated over the years, no matter how sophisticated and well-thought-out their views. If real objectivity was possible in interpreting the law, our courts would hardly be necessary, or their perennial injunction would be: “Just do what the law says.” But as in life, every legal situation is different and in the hands of the best jurors each requires an extraction of the intent of our laws applied to what is almost always new ground. The Federal Constitution clearly states its intent as to “promote the general welfare.” The question then becomes, to what extent can we set aside our prejudices to bring our interpretations of the law in line with this intent? Compared with this perspective, it becomes clear that a majority on the Supreme Court often gives preferential treatment to the powerful over the individual, who lately has been deprived of equal footing with corporations, law enforcement, government, etc. Scalia is at the vanguard of those who are leading us away from equal protection under the law. To follow his argument of strict interpretation still further, we would have no Federal Bank or any other government institution that is not mentioned in the Constitution. Like those on the court who often join him in denying individual rights, he is a poor listener who often seems to have made up his mind well before a case is heard.

There is an expression: “Those who are certain of the truth speak it calmly and confidently, those who are uncertain shout loudly to convince themselves and others.” Scalia is at the forefront of the shouters ─ he is often on the circuit giving lectures, in his offhand and charming manner, to justify his views. Perhaps he fears that his legacy will be as unkind to him as he has been to the Constitution. Unfortunately he and those like him are moving our country a giant step backwards ─ away from the protections promised in the Constitution. It will take years, if not generations, to recover.