The Jurisprudential Vision Of Justice Antonin Scalia

That Scalia has most profoundly affected, particularly constitutional protections for property rights. Citing Scalia's use of judicial review to check legislative power and his attempts to limit several types of individual rights developed during the Warren and Burger courts, the authors conclude that Scalia's decisions reflect an effort to create a post-Carolene Products jurisprudence and to form a new pattern of assumptions regarding the role of the Supreme Court in.

In the new afterword Ralph Rossum covers Antonin Scalia’s entire career and discusses the thirty-eight major opinions since the original 2006 publication, including District of Columbia v. Heller, his dissent in the Obamacare cases of NFIB v. Sebelius and King v. Burwell, his important recess appointments case of NLRB v. Noel Canning, his procedural decisions on the Fourth Amendment and the Confrontation Clause, his equal protection (racial preference) opinions, and Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation. Lionized by the right and demonized by the left, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is the high court's quintessential conservative. Witty, outspoken, often abrasive, he is widely regarded as the most controversial member of the Court. This book is the first comprehensive, reasoned, and sympathetic analysis of how Scalia has decided cases during his entire twenty-year Supreme Court tenure. Ralph Rossum focuses on Scalia's more than 600 Supreme Court opinions and dissents-carefully wrought, passionately argued, and filled with well-turned phrases-which portray him as an eloquent defender of an "original meaning" jurisprudence. He also includes analyses of Scalia's Court of Appeals opinions for the D.C. circuit, his major law review articles as a law professor and judge, and his provocative book, A Matter of Interpretation. Rossum reveals Scalia's understanding of key issues confronting today's Court, such as the separation of powers, federalism, the free speech and press and religion clauses of the First Amendment, and the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. He suggests that Scalia displays such a keen interest in defending federalism that he sometimes departs from text and tradition, and reveals that he has disagreed with other justices most often in decisions involving the meaning of the First Amendment's establishment clause. He also analyzes Scalia's positions on the commerce clause and habeas corpus clause of Article I, the take care clause of Article II, the criminal procedural provisions of Amendments Four through Eight, protection of state sovereign immunity in the Eleventh Amendment, and Congress's enforcement power under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment. The first book to fully articulate the contours of Scalia's constitutional philosophy and jurisprudence, Rossum's insightful study ultimately depicts Scalia as a principled, consistent, and intelligent textualist who is fearless and resolute, notwithstanding the controversy he often inspires.

The most comprehensive study of Justice Scalia's politics and jurisprudence yet published, Justice Antonin Scalia and the Conservative Revival joins a vital discussion on contemporary American conservatism and the use of the law to restrain or undermine the New Deal state.

That Scalia has most profoundly affected, particularly constitutional protections for property rights. Citing Scalia's use of judicial review to check legislative power and his attempts to limit several types of individual rights developed during the Warren and Burger courts, the authors conclude that Scalia's decisions reflect an effort to create a post-Carolene Products jurisprudence and to form a new pattern of assumptions regarding the role of the Supreme Court in.

An eye-opening look at the influential Supreme Court justice who disrupted American jurisprudence in order to delegitimize opponents and establish a conservative legal order

Justice Antonin Scalia (1936–2016) was the single most important figure in the emergence of the “new originalist” interpretation of the US Constitution, which sought to anchor the court’s interpretation of the Constitution to the ordinary meaning of the words at the time of drafting. For Scalia, the meaning of constitutional provisions and statutes was rigidly fixed by their original meanings with little concern for extratextual considerations. While some lauded his uncompromising principles, others argued that such a rigid view of the Constitution both denies and attempts to limit the discretion of judges in ways that damage and distort our system of law. In this edited collection, leading scholars from law, political science, philosophy, rhetoric, and linguistics look at the ways Scalia framed and stated his arguments. Focusing on rhetorical strategies rather than the logic or validity of Scalia’s legal arguments, the contributors collectively reveal that Scalia enacted his rigidly conservative vision of the law through his rhetorical framing.

"Antonin Scalia and American Constitutionalism is a critical study of Justice Antonin Scalia's jurisprudence, his work on the U.S. Supreme Court, and his significance for an understanding of American constitutionalism. After tracing Scalia's emergence as a hero of the political right and his opposition to many of the decisions of the Warren Court, this book examines his general jurisprudential theory of originalism and textualism, arguing that he failed to produce either the objective method he claimed or the "correct" constitutional results he promised. Focusing on his judicial performance over his thirty years on the Court, the book examines his opinions on virtually all of the constitutional issues he addressed, from fundamentals of structure to most major constitutional provisions. The book argues that Scalia applied his jurisprudential theories in inconsistent ways and often ignored, twisted, or abandoned the interpretive methods he proclaimed, in most cases reaching results that were consistent with "conservative" politics and the ideology of the post-Reagan Republican Party. Most broadly, it argues that Scalia's jurisprudence and career are particularly significant because they exemplify-contrary to his own persistent claims-three paramount characteristics of American constitutionalism: the inherent inadequacy of "originalism" and other formal interpretive methodologies to produce "correct" answers to controverted constitutional questions; the relationship-particularly close in Scalia's case-between constitutional interpretations on one hand and substantive personal and political goals on the other; and the truly and unavoidably "living" nature of American constitutionalism itself. As a historical matter, the book concludes, Scalia stands as a towering figure of irony because his judicial career disproved the central claims of his own jurisprudence"--