Antonin Scalia, Lawyer, Scholar, Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court (1936-2016)

Screen Shot 2016-02-13 at 4.50.29 PM

“This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves….

“A system of government that makes the People subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy….

“The world does not expect logic and precision in poetry or inspirational pop-philosophy; it demands them in the law.”

Justice Scalia’s dissent in Obergefell v. Hodges, June 26, 2015.

Rest in peace.

UPDATE: Justice Scalia’s Great Heart. Please read this.

7 thoughts on “Antonin Scalia, Lawyer, Scholar, Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court (1936-2016)”

  1. That dissent is a classic. Just a brilliant man. It may be a long time before we see someone of his stature again, and I’m inclined to think to think the country is greatly diminished from this loss.

    Maybe we can take some comfort from Scalia’s own words from a lighter moment during his grandaughters’ graduation commencement last year

    “Class of 2015, you should not leave Stone Ridge High School thinking that you face challenges that are at all, in any important sense, unprecedented,” he said. “Humanity has been around for at least some 5,000 years or so, and I doubt that the basic challenges as confronted are any worse now, or alas even much different, from what they ever were.”

  2. I suppose my thoughts should be with the family and not with what his passing portends for those left behind. RIP Judge Scalia

  3. Just reading the Heller case from 2008 where Scalia gave the majority opinion striking down the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns

    If “bear arms” means, as we think, simply the carrying of arms, a modifier can limit the purpose of the carriage (“for the purpose of self-defense” or “to make war against the King”). But if “bear arms” means, as the petitioners and the dissent think, the carrying of arms only for military purposes, one simply cannot add “for the purpose of killing game.” The right “to carry arms in the militia for the purpose of killing game” is worthy of the mad hatter. Thus, these purposive qualifying phrases positively establish that “to bear arms” is not limited to military use.

    Extremely comprehensive.
    The Republic is immeasurably stronger today because of Justice Scalia.

  4. If we were still a nation of laws and not men, we would raise a glass to his memory, rather than fear what his successor might do.

    Think about that for a moment.

  5. Hopefully the glass would contain a potion strong enough to allow us to forget the pillow, and once again, this era of extraordinary coincidence. Things just got lit in Luna City.

Comments are closed.