Mr. Kotter
03-25-2005, 11:31 AM
Scalia: Next Supreme Court Chief Justice?
I sure as hell hope he is our next Chief Justice, although I know the my fellow Democrats will do their best to see that it doesn't happen.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050315/ap_on_go_su_co/scalia_1
Justice Scalia made a speech to the Woodrow Wilson Center, and I love this guy and his view of the U.S. Constitution, the meaning of Democracy, the politicization of our Courts, which includes the Supreme Court, and the failure of our nation to adhere to the strict interpretation of our Constitution.
Here's a sampling of what he said which seems quite true, given my understanding of government and history:
In a 35-minute speech Monday, Scalia said unelected judges have no place deciding issues such as abortion and the death penalty. The court's 5-4 ruling March 1 to outlaw the juvenile death penalty based on "evolving notions of decency" was simply a mask for the personal policy preferences of the five-member majority, he said.
Seeming to be a direct slam against his fellow Justices, he added:
"If you think aficionados of a living Constitution want to bring you flexibility, think again," Scalia told an audience at the Woodrow Wilson Center, a Washington think tank. "You think the death penalty is a good idea? Persuade your fellow citizens to adopt it. You want a right to abortion? Persuade your fellow citizens and enact it. That's flexibility."
"Why in the world would you have it interpreted by nine lawyers?" he said.
Then he tackles the issue of abortion, and sort of, laments: citing the example of abortion, he said unelected justices too often choose to read new rights into the Constitution, at the expense of the democratic process.
The power to create a Constitutional Amendment was provided by our Founding Fathers to be exercised under the most extreme of necessary conditions, otherwise it wouldn't require such a monstrous process to go through for enactment.
Scalia also slammed Earl Warren as Chief Justice, for the politicization of our Highest Court. He blamed Chief Justice Earl Warren, who presided from 1953-69 over a court that assaulted racial segregation and expanded individual rights against arbitrary government searches, for the increased political role of the Supreme Court, citing Warren's political background. Warren was governor of California and the Republican vice presidential nominee in 1948.
"You have a chief justice who was a governor, a policy-maker, who approached the law with that frame of mind. Once you have a leader with that mentality, it's hard not to follow," Scalia said, in response to a question from the audience.
Scalia said increased politics on the court will create a bitter nomination fight for the next Supreme Court appointee, since judges are now more concerned with promoting their personal policy preferences rather than interpreting the law.
"If we're picking people to draw out of their own conscience and experience a 'new' Constitution, we should not look principally for good lawyers. We should look to people who agree with us," he said, explaining that's why senators increasingly probe nominees for their personal views on positions such as abortion.
"When we are in that mode, you realize we have rendered the Constitution useless," Scalia said.
I sure as hell hope he is our next Chief Justice, although I know the my fellow Democrats will do their best to see that it doesn't happen.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050315/ap_on_go_su_co/scalia_1
Justice Scalia made a speech to the Woodrow Wilson Center, and I love this guy and his view of the U.S. Constitution, the meaning of Democracy, the politicization of our Courts, which includes the Supreme Court, and the failure of our nation to adhere to the strict interpretation of our Constitution.
Here's a sampling of what he said which seems quite true, given my understanding of government and history:
In a 35-minute speech Monday, Scalia said unelected judges have no place deciding issues such as abortion and the death penalty. The court's 5-4 ruling March 1 to outlaw the juvenile death penalty based on "evolving notions of decency" was simply a mask for the personal policy preferences of the five-member majority, he said.
Seeming to be a direct slam against his fellow Justices, he added:
"If you think aficionados of a living Constitution want to bring you flexibility, think again," Scalia told an audience at the Woodrow Wilson Center, a Washington think tank. "You think the death penalty is a good idea? Persuade your fellow citizens to adopt it. You want a right to abortion? Persuade your fellow citizens and enact it. That's flexibility."
"Why in the world would you have it interpreted by nine lawyers?" he said.
Then he tackles the issue of abortion, and sort of, laments: citing the example of abortion, he said unelected justices too often choose to read new rights into the Constitution, at the expense of the democratic process.
The power to create a Constitutional Amendment was provided by our Founding Fathers to be exercised under the most extreme of necessary conditions, otherwise it wouldn't require such a monstrous process to go through for enactment.
Scalia also slammed Earl Warren as Chief Justice, for the politicization of our Highest Court. He blamed Chief Justice Earl Warren, who presided from 1953-69 over a court that assaulted racial segregation and expanded individual rights against arbitrary government searches, for the increased political role of the Supreme Court, citing Warren's political background. Warren was governor of California and the Republican vice presidential nominee in 1948.
"You have a chief justice who was a governor, a policy-maker, who approached the law with that frame of mind. Once you have a leader with that mentality, it's hard not to follow," Scalia said, in response to a question from the audience.
Scalia said increased politics on the court will create a bitter nomination fight for the next Supreme Court appointee, since judges are now more concerned with promoting their personal policy preferences rather than interpreting the law.
"If we're picking people to draw out of their own conscience and experience a 'new' Constitution, we should not look principally for good lawyers. We should look to people who agree with us," he said, explaining that's why senators increasingly probe nominees for their personal views on positions such as abortion.
"When we are in that mode, you realize we have rendered the Constitution useless," Scalia said.