Justice Antonin Scalia Summary
Justice Antonin Scalia has said in the past regarding abortion that there is nothing in the Constitution that mentions anything about a right to abortion. The Constitution simply states nothing about this issue. One possible way to fix whether there is a female right for women or not is to look at how most rights are created in a democratic society and then either amend the Constitution, or create a law. The Constitution cannot compromise, but a law can because the Constitution as Justice Scalia believed is a document that is meant to hinder and restrain from change. The Constitution is our supreme law of the land, and it is not and should not be meant to encourage or make change happen.
It can be argued that the Supreme Court is very much influenced by public opinion. If the Court were in fact influenced by public opinion, then it would be dependent on what the people think. Being concerned about what the people think is important, but this can make the Court seem just as political as congress and the president. As a …show more content…
traditional textualist, I think that it is important to respect the opinions of others, both of which concern the public as well as the viewpoints of the other members of the Court. There are times when cases should be overruled, but what the public thinks or believe is right, or wrong, should not be the basis for what justices determine in a particular case and I believe that it is the duty of a judge and a justice to make decisions without much influence from outside sources. The public interest can, for instance, be of influence to provoke thoughts and conversation within the Court, but it should not be the only basis or a foundation on which a decided is rested upon.
On being a good judge, Justice Antonin Scalia once said “If you’re going to be a good and faithful judge, you have to resign yourself to the fact that you’re not always going to like the conclusions you reach. If you like them all the time, you’re probably doing something wrong.” This quote can speak for itself, but I would most definitely be a strategic justice and I look up to Justice Scalia’s thought on being a justice. But I would not be focused simply on getting to five votes as often times, what we may not initially agree with may turn out to be a good result that we later may come to agree with. I do not believe that one should ever compromise in reaching a decision because no matter what, nothing in life is perfect and we have just sometimes accept that certain decisions happen for a reason. For Justice William Brennan, getting a majority vote in any case was of the most importance. He was a believer that with five votes, anything could be accomplished. But it is not all about just getting five votes because there are times when the law should be overturned, for instance, when there is discrepancy between the law and the Constitution.
Becoming a justice of the United States Supreme Court is a dream that I never thought would be possible and if I am to be officially confirmed into this wonderful branch of government, then I would strive of course to get a majority win in issues and cases that I believe should come out a certain way. But I also agree with Justice Antonin Scalia in that one should not always be focused on getting to five, because the reality of the situation is that that will not always be the case. If I am dependent and preoccupied with always reaching five votes, then I will always be discontent. But if I strive to put the best argument out there, then it is more easier for me to understand why certain issues came out the way they did. Now while some issues are of great importance, the people have to understand this concept as well.
For Supreme Court members on the bench, it should be the law and the mere text of the Constitution that is the driving force behind judicial decision-making. It should be about the law, not about the power of getting to five. And it is important to prepare for cases as most justices have in the past when arguing a case so that there is lesser of a chance of not getting to five. The preparation that takes place beforehand plays a crucial part in the judicial process. If getting to five was what it was all about, then one might ask what the purpose of judicial review is. We would then not need justices who could defend laws that conflict with the Constitution. A lawyer is an example of an individual that can focus on getting to five because lawyers for the most part often make great arguments and are able to convince judges to rule on their side. This should not be the case however and it should be left up the judicial branch to solve some of the most difficult problems that society faces.
As a young woman, I look up to Ruth Bader Ginsburg the most, who is also known as notorious RBG for her strength and example, and every time I hear and learn about her life, I am always left in awe. In 1959, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was one of the 12 women from the graduating class of Columbia Law School, a time where no anti-discrimination laws existed and employers were upfront that they did not want to hire a woman. In 1971, when she argued the gender discrimination case of Reed vs. Reed before the Supreme Court, she was very strategic in letting to court see that the classifications at the time more often that not put women not on a pedestal, but in a cage. The verdict of the case turned out to be what RBG has been fighting for, the outlaw of sex discrimination. In 1993, when President Bill Clinton nominated RBG as a Supreme Court Justice, she became the second serving female justice on the court. I believe that throughout her years on the bench, RBG has interpreted the law wisely. Although she has a different legal approach than the philosophy that Justice Scalia had on the Supreme Court, both of these Justices believed that the law should exist to serve.
I have always been truly inspired by all of Justice Ginsburg’s achievement, most notably her arguments in many women’s rights cases. As the great feminist that she is, she has long fought for the equal treatment of women. Her advocacy for women rights grew because of the gender discrimination that she dealt with after graduating college and being unable to secure employment. Ruth Bader Ginsburg alongside Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Sandra Day O'Connor have paved the way for generations and have shown the difference that women make in American life. One of the greatest achievements of Ruth Bader Ginsburg is her journey to becoming a Supreme Court justice. Not only was she female in a time in history where women’s right were not regarded equal, but she was also faced with the reality of there not being many opportunities for her grow and become a leader. When trying to find a job, employers would disregard her because she was a woman and a mother and Justice Ginsburg for me has served as a true role model because she made the impossible possible. She made the world know that it is up to every individual to recognize and become aware that we live in a system that might not always work to our favor, and it is our very desire and strength to not give up and make a path to the journey of our success.
Justice Ginsburg in more recent times has had to deal with comments that express that she should retire so that the president can be the one to nominate the next Justice before the president in the current race is announced, but she has not let those remarks hold her back.
She remains strong because she is notorious and because she believes that she has the potential to continue influencing the Court. I admire RBG’s strength and hope that she is able to serve on the Court for as long as she is able to do so because her love for the work she does is quite evident through all that she has done for our society. And even though Justice Scalia’s ideology is different than it is to that of Justice Ginsburg, I think that one thing that they have in common is their ability to boldly argue cases. When they, as an example, intend to write a dissent on an issue, they do it strategically both laying out the cons and stating why or how the Court decided
wrongly.
As a nominee whose ideology is similar to that of Justice Scalia’s in regards to preserving the intent of the founders, the court is not expected to take a dramatic turn by my appointment. Justice Anthony Kennedy has been one of the most influential justices on the current court and he has without a doubt made his mark on the law. If I have to honor to be confirmed and replace Justice Kennedy, then the court can anticipate for a balance that is focused on the words of the supreme law of the land, which is the Constitution. Justice Kennedy and Justice Scalia are much alike in that they fall along similar ideological lines on most issues, except for a few such as the issue of same-sex marriage. While Justice Scalia is a strict constructionist who holds an originalist approach, Justice Kennedy has relied on a libertarian, natural law based approach in which he believes that the issues of today’s society should be interpreted into the Constitution that were not anticipated at the time the document was created in the late 1700s. And while my ideology is not completely similar to that of the president, I appreciate that he has noticed my skill in the law. It has been a standard for the most part for the president to choose nominees who share identical values, but that is not always the case as can be seen through my own selection. I am extremely grateful to President Obama for his mere thought of choosing me as a nominee. If I am fortunate enough to be confirmed, then I will serve the United States Supreme Court to the best of my ability and continue the legacy of the women who have served in the judicial branch as justices up until this day. I will forever be inspired by the work that justices Sonia Sotomayor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan, and Sandra Day O'Connor have contributed to society and law and will always do my best to serve the law, and not make it.
It can be argued that the Supreme Court is very much influenced by public opinion. If the Court were in fact influenced by public opinion, then it would be dependent on what the people think. Being concerned about what the people think is important, but this can make the Court seem just as political as congress and the president. As a …show more content…
traditional textualist, I think that it is important to respect the opinions of others, both of which concern the public as well as the viewpoints of the other members of the Court. There are times when cases should be overruled, but what the public thinks or believe is right, or wrong, should not be the basis for what justices determine in a particular case and I believe that it is the duty of a judge and a justice to make decisions without much influence from outside sources. The public interest can, for instance, be of influence to provoke thoughts and conversation within the Court, but it should not be the only basis or a foundation on which a decided is rested upon.
On being a good judge, Justice Antonin Scalia once said “If you’re going to be a good and faithful judge, you have to resign yourself to the fact that you’re not always going to like the conclusions you reach. If you like them all the time, you’re probably doing something wrong.” This quote can speak for itself, but I would most definitely be a strategic justice and I look up to Justice Scalia’s thought on being a justice. But I would not be focused simply on getting to five votes as often times, what we may not initially agree with may turn out to be a good result that we later may come to agree with. I do not believe that one should ever compromise in reaching a decision because no matter what, nothing in life is perfect and we have just sometimes accept that certain decisions happen for a reason. For Justice William Brennan, getting a majority vote in any case was of the most importance. He was a believer that with five votes, anything could be accomplished. But it is not all about just getting five votes because there are times when the law should be overturned, for instance, when there is discrepancy between the law and the Constitution.
Becoming a justice of the United States Supreme Court is a dream that I never thought would be possible and if I am to be officially confirmed into this wonderful branch of government, then I would strive of course to get a majority win in issues and cases that I believe should come out a certain way. But I also agree with Justice Antonin Scalia in that one should not always be focused on getting to five, because the reality of the situation is that that will not always be the case. If I am dependent and preoccupied with always reaching five votes, then I will always be discontent. But if I strive to put the best argument out there, then it is more easier for me to understand why certain issues came out the way they did. Now while some issues are of great importance, the people have to understand this concept as well.
For Supreme Court members on the bench, it should be the law and the mere text of the Constitution that is the driving force behind judicial decision-making. It should be about the law, not about the power of getting to five. And it is important to prepare for cases as most justices have in the past when arguing a case so that there is lesser of a chance of not getting to five. The preparation that takes place beforehand plays a crucial part in the judicial process. If getting to five was what it was all about, then one might ask what the purpose of judicial review is. We would then not need justices who could defend laws that conflict with the Constitution. A lawyer is an example of an individual that can focus on getting to five because lawyers for the most part often make great arguments and are able to convince judges to rule on their side. This should not be the case however and it should be left up the judicial branch to solve some of the most difficult problems that society faces.
As a young woman, I look up to Ruth Bader Ginsburg the most, who is also known as notorious RBG for her strength and example, and every time I hear and learn about her life, I am always left in awe. In 1959, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was one of the 12 women from the graduating class of Columbia Law School, a time where no anti-discrimination laws existed and employers were upfront that they did not want to hire a woman. In 1971, when she argued the gender discrimination case of Reed vs. Reed before the Supreme Court, she was very strategic in letting to court see that the classifications at the time more often that not put women not on a pedestal, but in a cage. The verdict of the case turned out to be what RBG has been fighting for, the outlaw of sex discrimination. In 1993, when President Bill Clinton nominated RBG as a Supreme Court Justice, she became the second serving female justice on the court. I believe that throughout her years on the bench, RBG has interpreted the law wisely. Although she has a different legal approach than the philosophy that Justice Scalia had on the Supreme Court, both of these Justices believed that the law should exist to serve.
I have always been truly inspired by all of Justice Ginsburg’s achievement, most notably her arguments in many women’s rights cases. As the great feminist that she is, she has long fought for the equal treatment of women. Her advocacy for women rights grew because of the gender discrimination that she dealt with after graduating college and being unable to secure employment. Ruth Bader Ginsburg alongside Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Sandra Day O'Connor have paved the way for generations and have shown the difference that women make in American life. One of the greatest achievements of Ruth Bader Ginsburg is her journey to becoming a Supreme Court justice. Not only was she female in a time in history where women’s right were not regarded equal, but she was also faced with the reality of there not being many opportunities for her grow and become a leader. When trying to find a job, employers would disregard her because she was a woman and a mother and Justice Ginsburg for me has served as a true role model because she made the impossible possible. She made the world know that it is up to every individual to recognize and become aware that we live in a system that might not always work to our favor, and it is our very desire and strength to not give up and make a path to the journey of our success.
Justice Ginsburg in more recent times has had to deal with comments that express that she should retire so that the president can be the one to nominate the next Justice before the president in the current race is announced, but she has not let those remarks hold her back.
She remains strong because she is notorious and because she believes that she has the potential to continue influencing the Court. I admire RBG’s strength and hope that she is able to serve on the Court for as long as she is able to do so because her love for the work she does is quite evident through all that she has done for our society. And even though Justice Scalia’s ideology is different than it is to that of Justice Ginsburg, I think that one thing that they have in common is their ability to boldly argue cases. When they, as an example, intend to write a dissent on an issue, they do it strategically both laying out the cons and stating why or how the Court decided
wrongly.
As a nominee whose ideology is similar to that of Justice Scalia’s in regards to preserving the intent of the founders, the court is not expected to take a dramatic turn by my appointment. Justice Anthony Kennedy has been one of the most influential justices on the current court and he has without a doubt made his mark on the law. If I have to honor to be confirmed and replace Justice Kennedy, then the court can anticipate for a balance that is focused on the words of the supreme law of the land, which is the Constitution. Justice Kennedy and Justice Scalia are much alike in that they fall along similar ideological lines on most issues, except for a few such as the issue of same-sex marriage. While Justice Scalia is a strict constructionist who holds an originalist approach, Justice Kennedy has relied on a libertarian, natural law based approach in which he believes that the issues of today’s society should be interpreted into the Constitution that were not anticipated at the time the document was created in the late 1700s. And while my ideology is not completely similar to that of the president, I appreciate that he has noticed my skill in the law. It has been a standard for the most part for the president to choose nominees who share identical values, but that is not always the case as can be seen through my own selection. I am extremely grateful to President Obama for his mere thought of choosing me as a nominee. If I am fortunate enough to be confirmed, then I will serve the United States Supreme Court to the best of my ability and continue the legacy of the women who have served in the judicial branch as justices up until this day. I will forever be inspired by the work that justices Sonia Sotomayor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan, and Sandra Day O'Connor have contributed to society and law and will always do my best to serve the law, and not make it.