Skip to main content

View Diary: On Constitutional Interpretation: Originalism v. A Living Constitution? (286 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Robert Bork (none)
    Judge Bork, another famous "originalist," argued in his writings that the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment applied solely to blacks and not to women.  When asked about his view in his Supreme Court confirmation hearings, Judge Bork backed off his extreme views.  As we all know, the Senate rejected Judge Bork by the largest rejection margin in history, 58-42.

    It's scary to know that there is at least one person sitting on the Supreme Court who judges the 21st century by 1787 standards.

    By the way, great diary, Armando.  Some of my previous diaries and comments have been about the originalism vs. living Constitution debate.

    •  actually, there are two. (none)
      Clarence Thomas concurs with Scalia almost 90% of the time.  

      "Oh, how I miss the days of Monica Lewinsky..."

      by LawSkoolPunk on Sat Jul 23, 2005 at 12:54:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Clarence Thomas's judicial philosphy (none)
        Justice Thomas describes his philosophy as natural law.  He believes that economic rights should be protected just as much as other rights are protected.  Justice Thomas in one respect is more extreme than Justice Scalia in that Justice Thomas is much more willing to overturn precendent than Justice Scalia, although they both voted to overturn Miranda in 2000 (See Dickerson v. United States).

        To me, you are right -- both Justices Scalia and Thomas judge the 21st century by 1787 standards.  This really sends shivers down my spine.  And Chief Justice Rehnquist, who once wrote in favor of segregation and was the sole dissenter in United States v. Bob Jones, where the court ruled it was constitution to deny tax exempt status to schools that discriminate, is not much better than Thomas or Scalia.  History will not be kind to Chief Justice Rehnquist, who will be remembered for opinions quite harmful to African Americans.  Anyhow, having a Supreme Court with three justices like Thomas, Scalia, and Rehnquist is really sad and harmful to our great nation's social progress.  These justices really want to repeal the great advances of the historic Warren court.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site