All Hail Scalia
Justice Antonin Scalia recently reviewed Steven D. Smith’s book Law’s Quandary. Scalia’s review is a fascinating read. My favorite part (besides his “LEAVE HERE OR DIE” hypothetical):
[I]n a democracy, it is not the function of law to establish any more social policy than what is fairly expressed by legislation, enacted through prescribed democratic procedures. It troubles Smith, but does not at all trouble me—in fact, it pleases me—that giving the words of the Constitution their normal meaning would “expel from the domain of legal issues . . . most of the constitutional disputes that capture our attention,” such as “Can a macho military educational institution dedicated to what is euphemistically called the ‘adversative’ method admit only men? Is there a right to abortion? Or to the assistance of a physician in ending one’s life?” If we should read English as English, Smith bemoans, “these questions would seemingly all have received the same answer: ‘No law on that one.’”
I wish all nine Supremes possessed the same judicial disposition and understanding of our representative democracy as does Justice Scalia. I wonder how Harriet Miers would respond to Scalia’s observation of truth?
Hat Tip: Southern Appeal