July 28, 2010

Scalia renders opinions about the original Constitution and moral decisions at MSU lecture

by Carol Schmidt
MSU News Service

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is not happy with the intrusion of politics into the selection process of justices for the Supreme Court, nor does he feel that he and his fellow jurists are any "more qualified to decide cases involving the leading moral questions of the day than medical doctors, engineers or even Joe Six-Pack."

Scalia, who is the longest serving justice on the U.S. Supreme Court, told a capacity crowd of 220 Wednesday night at the Hager Auditorium at Montana State University's Museum of the Rockies that his appointment by Ronald Reagan to the high court in 1986 was approved by the Senate by a vote of 98-0. "Yet, if I were to be confirmed today I might get 60 votes."

"What has occurred is betrayed even by the terminology by which the confirmation debates are conducted," Scalia said during his speech, "Mullahs of the West: Judges as Moral Arbiters." "The Senate is looking for moderate judges. What in the world is a moderate interpretation of a constitutional text? Half-way between what it says and what we would like it to say?"

The original interpretation of the U.S. Constitution was at the heart of Scalia's remarks during his first visit to MSU. He is known as the high court's most ardent "originalist," which means he maintains that the original language of the Constitution should prevail and endure. This opposes those who argue that the Constitution is a living, evolving document.

As he was introduced, Scalia said that he believes that the "dividing line in this county isn't between liberals and conservatives; the bigger question is the Constitution and those who believe it does not change and those who think it evolves."

Read the complete story (Some news sites require registration)