Analyzing Antonin Scalia's Case

Antonin Scalia was an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court from September 1986, until February 2016, when he unfortunately passed away. Scalia was born in New Jersey but later moved to Queens in New York (Reilly, 2016). Scalia’s parents were both teachers, which may have been why he was valedictorian when graduating from St. Francis Xavier high school. After high school, he went to Georgetown University, where he also graduated at the top of his class, achieving the honor of valedictorian yet again (Reilly, 2016). Scalia got his bachelor’s degree in history, but wanted to further his education, so he went on to Harvard Law School, where he graduated again as valedictorian of his class in 1960 (Reilly, 2016). After graduating from Harvard Law, Scalia worked in a private practice for just a couple of years, only to discover he would rather be teaching as a law professor at a University, which is what he ended up doing.
He taught at the University of Virginia for about 4 years, but then changed his profession again when appointed as general counsel for the Office of Telecommuting Policy by President Richard Nixon (Reilly, 2016).
He went on to become Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel, then 8 years later he was nominated to the United States Court of Appeals by Ronald Regan. During Regan’s presidency, Scalia was appointed, and confirmed by the senate to be one of the Associate Justices on the Supreme Court (Reilly, 2016). Antonin Scalia earned his place on the Supreme Court through hard work, and dedication to the Judicial System throughout his career. Scalia’s voice will never be forgotten because he remained to have a strong conservative view throughout his career, and always vocalized his opinions on issues brought forth in the
courtroom. Antonin Scalia was known to interpret the law through an “originalist” lens. Scalia, like newly nominated Neil Gorsuch, understand the U.S. Constitution as the foundation for our nation, and that judges should not stray away from the literal meanings in the Constitution when interpreting the law. Scalia also followed the U.S. Constitution by consistently agreeing with the founders that the States should handle their own disputes if it does not directly affect the whole nation. For instance, Scalia’s views on abortion were clear because abortion was never mentioned in the Constitution. Scalia did not think it was “right” to make abortion legal in every state, or on a national level because the founders did not agree that it was significant enough of an issue to put in the Constitution, which meant that it should be left up to legislators to agree if it should be legal or not in each state. When Antonin Scalia was interviewed by Piers Morgan, a former CNN host, he was asked about his views on abortion, and had plenty to share on the topic. Scalia’s response to this topic was, “My view is that regardless of whether you think prohibiting abortion is good or whether you think prohibiting abortion is bad, regardless of how you come out on that, my only point is the Constitution does not say anything about it,” Scalia explained. “It leaves it up to democratic choice. Some states prohibited it and some states didn’t. What Roe vs. Wade said was that no state can prohibit it. That is simply not in the Constitution” (Ertelt, S., 2012). This statement emphasizes the fact that Scalia was a strict constructionist, as well as an originalist because of his views on how the judicial system should only interpret the Constitution exactly the way the founders wrote it, and that any other interpretations should not be accepted. Overall, Scalia did not agree with the opinions of other judges about how laws should change just because society does.