Posted on 05/05/2005 3:22:31 PM PDT by Constitutionalist Conservative
May 5, 2005 Criticizing those who believe the Constitution should be flexible and adapted to modern times, Associate Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said Thursday during a speech at Texas A&M University that there is no such thing as the living Constitution.
Scalia was speaking as part of the Twanna M. Powell Lecture at the George Bush Presidential Conference Center.
Im what you call an originalist, one who believes the Constitution should be interpreted exactly as it was adopted, Scalia added.
It should be interpreted as it was written nothing more, nothing less. Rights do not grow smaller or larger. Some legal experts say you have to interpret the Constitution broadly, but thats not true under any circumstance.
Scalia, who was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1986 by President Ronald Reagan, added, You hear the phrase the living Constitution and that its a living document. Im a believer in the dead Constitution. Maybe we should better phrase it the enduring Constitution.
The Constitution is not a living document. Its a legal document, and legal documents do not change.
Scalia said that such controversial subjects as the death penalty and abortion are really not Constitutional issues because theres not one word about them in the Constitution. People who believe in a living Constitution would like to see such things as un-Constitutional.
The Constitution, he added, does exactly what its supposed to do: It provides stability, he said.
Bush , when introducing Scalia, said that he was a free spirit and deep thinker. He shares his views openly, and he is certainly thought-provoking.
Among the overflow crowd to hear Scalia were members of the Texas Supreme Court, the Fifth Court of Circuit Appeals and numerous federal and state judges.
A native of Trenton, N.J., Scalia graduated from Harvard Law School and was a Sheldon Fellow of Harvard University. He was also a law professor at the University of Virginia and the University of Chicago and visiting law professor at Stanford and Georgetown. He served the federal government as General Counsel of the Office of Telecommunications Policy and was appointed judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for District of Columbia in 1982.
He and his wife, Maureen, have nine children.
Scalia, who was approved as a Supreme Court justice by a vote of 98-0, said such approval would never happen today. Congress wants moderates and a moderate interpretation of the Constitution. The living Constitution idea is seductive to the man on the street, and even to some judges.
But we must apply the words as they were originally written and we must be bound by their original meaning. We must think of what the words are and what the words meant when the people adopted them.
The Constitution doesnt morph to be what we want it to be.
Scalia said if there were one change he could make to the Constitution, it would be to make amendments to it an easier process.
Amendments are not easy to do, he added.
They must be ratified by three-fourths of the states. But someone figured out that with the population disparity of states today, only two percent of the total population could prevent an amendment from being passed. Its very difficult to get an amendment passed.
"There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations."
James Madison
sorry - tried -
I thought you meant tied tightly around the neck.
Hehe....just so. Try to re-interpret the meaning of a subpoena or a search warrant and see what a judge has to say about it. It's amazing sometimes the level of utter BS that people will choose to believe. Well, perhaps not so amazing after all.
;o)
BTTT
9 children?
I never knew.
My hero.
Procreate baby!
"Bush , when introducing Scalia, ..."
Bush was there?
James Madison
Oh yeah. We witness it every day.
BTTT
FMCDH(BITS)
The fifth Ammendment sets out the safeguard for
being tried for a ''Capital'' crime. While the term
''death'' is not used, a capital crime is one for which
you lose your capit - ''head''.
IMHO, the 5th condones the death penalty because it sets
the guidelines for imposing it.
Scalia for Chief Justice.
Actually it can change, and it's been changed 27 times - with amendments.
Yes, it is hard to do, and rightfully so. It contains wisdom of ages and new wisdom doesn't come by that fast or easily.
The Emancipation Proclomantion is not law as defined by the Constitution, as far as I can tell.
You are so right.
Is he saying that diversity is not a legitimate interest of the federal government since it is not mentioned in the Constitution? That will not make the Bush crowd happy.
A living Constitution would be the death of the Republic.
I love Scalia. The beauty of simplicity. Think of Marcus Aurelieus.....What is its nature...."The constitution is not a living document, it is a legal document, and legal documents do not change." Sorry, I got caught up in the moment...Another famous person told us to think of things in its simplicity.
Article IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
This seems fairly straightforward to me. Rights enumerated in the Constitution are rights permitted to the government. It really boils down to the fact that the "Bill of Rights" has always been misnamed and should have been called the "Bill of Restrictions". If you read them closely, you find that they never define anyone's rights, but certainly define what Congress is not allowed to do.
I would recommend "The Lost History of the Ninth" by Kurt Lash. Also the companion "The Lost Jurisprudence" by the same author. They are available for download (free)from the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) electronic library at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=505482.
You are correct CID. To interpret it any other way is to try to mould it to mean what they want it to say. This is what Scalia was talking about. Scalia clearly meant that the constitution did not weigh in on the death penalty. Therefore it is the perview of the state or the people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.