• Home
  • News
  • Scalia Returns to Originalist Themes and the Topic of Torture

U.S. Supreme Court

Scalia Returns to Originalist Themes and the Topic of Torture

Posted Mar 6, 2008 6:47 AM CST
By Debra Cassens Weiss

Justice Antonin Scalia revisited the subject of torture Tuesday evening in a speech to Missouri college students, after his previous comments on the subject provoked a liberal outcry.

Scalia said the use of aggressive interrogation techniques and domestic wiretapping are not expressly banned by the Constitution, the Columbia Tribune reports. Torture is “a bad thing to do. But not everything that is bad is unconstitutional," he said in the speech at the University of Central Missouri.

He suggested that every federal judge "be issued a stamp pad … and a stamp, and you would whack it on the pad and stomp it on the paper, and it says, ‘Stupid but constitutional.’ "

In February, Scalia told an interviewer that physical violence may be allowed to extract information to prevent an imminent terrorist threat. Asked about a hypothetical in which one person has the information needed to stop an attack, Scalia responded, “Seems to me you have to say, as unlikely as that is, it would be absurd to say that you can’t stick something under the fingernails, smack them in the face.”

In Tuesday's speech, Scalia emphasized his-oft repeated theme that the Constitution is not a living document, the Kansas City Star reports. “The Constitution does not change,” Scalia said. “It means today what it meant when it first was written. … It does not morph.”

Judges who believe in a morphing Constitution thwart the popular will, he said. "If you want the right to an abortion, persuade your fellow citizens it’s a good idea and pass a law,” he said. “If you feel the other way, repeal the law."

While Scalia doesn’t believe in a living Constitution, he does prefer that his dinner guests be that way. That revelation came in response to a question from an audience member, who asked Scalia to name a justice, living or dead, with whom he would like to have dinner.

“I have dinner with Ruth [Bader Ginsburg] once a year, and I certainly wouldn’t want to have dinner with a dead man,” he said.

A hat tip to How Appealing, which posted the stories.

Comments

1.

Jerrold E. Fink
Mar 6, 2008 10:54 AM CST

I recall watching a television series many years ago ( perhaps on PBS and perhaps titled something like Ethics /Religion and Law in America). There was a round table with many prominent participants/panelists with diverse backgrounds. The hosts/moderators were Harvard Law Professors.  In one of the programs ( perhaps moderated by Professor Ogletree ) , Justice Scalia was a panelist, as was, I seem to recall,  the Dean of the University of Texas Law School.  My recollection is that Justice Scalia argued that, from his Constitutional Law perspective, there was absolutely nothing in the Constitution that would prohibit a state from adopting an official state religion, imposing a tax on those who did not follow the official state religion, or even ban and criminally sanction religious practices which were not prescibed by the state. Does anyone remember/have access to a transcipt of this particular series/program?

Even on the Federal ( as opposed to the state level ) Justice Scalia does not consistently accept or apply an “Originalist” approach and, notwithstanding the First Amendment’s use of the unequivocal phrase “no law”, believes that Congress may
impose certain limitations or restrictions ( agreeable to Justice Scalia ) upon the freedom of religion, speech, etc.

Sometime, hopefully in my lifetime, I would hope that some intrepid reporter or debate moderator would ask certain candidates just what they mean when they say they would appoint Justices in the mold . or with the philosophy of, Justice Scalia. Does that candidate supprt a state sponsered religion, discrimination against those who do not adhere to the official religion, selective, subjective “originalism”?

Flag this comment

Add a Comment

We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.

Commenting has expired on this post.