Professional Documents
Culture Documents
http://artsfuse.org/116106/fuse-book-review-associate-justice-a...
Search
Editorial Dance
Oct
15
2014
Syndication
Media Resources
Donations
Television
Interview
Preview Review
Add comments
Subscribe
Bruce Allen Murphy conveys the impression that Scalia knows how he feels on every issue
before the briefs have been argued, then pulls out citations of law which justify his
pre-conceived notions.
Scalia: A Court of One, by Bruce Allen Murphy. Simon and Schuster, 644 pages, $35.00.
By Thomas Filbin
Hes a complicated man, but no one understands him but his woman. Isaac Hayes, theme
from the motion picture Shaft.
If ever there was a man who is defined
by, indeed trapped in, his culture,
religion, temperament, and upbringing,
it is Antonin Scalia, Associate Justice
In Brief
1 of 5
10/29/14, 5:29 PM
http://artsfuse.org/116106/fuse-book-review-associate-justice-a...
Bruce Allen Murphy, author of previous biographies of Justices Abe Fortas and William
Douglas, has written a thorough and scrupulously researched account of the life of a man
considered the most contentious, stubborn, and acerbic ideologue ever to sit on the court, and
those are just things his friends would say about him. Although appointed by Reagan as a
conservative, Scalia one by one alienated all of his natural allies on the court who were
them that they had missed some point of law or came to the right decision for the wrong
reasons. One gets the feeling that little Nino was told by his fourth grade teacher that he was
the smartest little boy who had ever come to P.S. 13 in Queens and he never got over it.
Born to Italian immigrant parents, he learned respect for learning and hard work from his
father who, through Herculean determination, learned English well enough to receive a
doctorate from Columbia. Antonin was educated by the Jesuits at Xavier High School in
Manhattan, where the classics were taught accompanied by military style discipline. An honors
NOW
LATER
student, he thought of Princeton but felt snubbed there in an interview because of his ethnicity,
and instead went to Georgetown where he was an outstanding scholar and prize debater. The
art of debate for him, however, was so competitive that it meant not merely winning on points,
but hammering his opponents into the ground. This trait might be useful for a trial lawyer, but
appellate judges are supposed to possess a reflective nature, hearing all the arguments and
@theartsfuse on Twitter
weighing them against one another before deciding. Murphy conveys the impression that
Scalia knows how he feels on every issue before the briefs have been argued, then pulls out
@theartsfuse
14h
19h
@theartsfuse
Fuse Poetry Review: The Collected Poems of
Samuel Beckett Castings
artsfuse.org/116185/fuse-po #SamuelBeckett
@groveatlantic
Expand
The Arts Fuse
20h
@theartsfuse
27 Oct
@theartsfuse
Websters 1828 edition of the dictionary. One can imagine eyes rolling in chambers as the other
justices listen to his declamations on all things from voting rights, gun laws, health care, and
Expand
treatise on the subject, but more so and more ridiculously when he cites things such as
same sex marriage. If it wasnt conceivable in 1789, it isnt permissible today seems to be his
mantra.
27 Oct
@theartsfuse
Tweet to @theartsfuse
The book spends a goodly amount of time on Scalias extra-judicial speechmaking. Judges
must be circumspect in their public comments lest they are thought to be players rather than
referees. A devout and conservative Catholic (certainly more Catholic than the current pope),
he lectures frequently at Catholic colleges and law schools, often citing the evil of religion
being banished from the public square by a wall of separation he feels the founders never
intended. The father of nine children and an ardent admirer of St. Thomas More, who lost his
head as Henry VIIIs chancellor for not assenting to the kings divorce and break from Rome,
Scalia sees himself similarly as a martyr of sorts for his beliefs. (Thomas More had earlier in
his career put some heretics to death, making you half imagine the justices heart is there as
well). His critics have suggested Scalias religion influences his judgments, although he denies
it, but he accepts no general constitutional right of privacy under which the court struck down
2 of 5
10/29/14, 5:29 PM
http://artsfuse.org/116106/fuse-book-review-associate-justice-a...
state laws criminalizing homosexual acts. He opposes abortion and same sex marriage, and
indeed has compared societal disapprobation of homosexuality as similar to disapproving of
murder, polygamy, or cruelty to animals. When called to account for it by a gay law student at
a lecture, Scalia denied it was a case of similars, but rather a reductio ad absurdum, which the
student should have known. Denigrating the opponent as well as disagreeing is the Nino style.
Despite Scalias claim of a judicial philosophy, he has never let it get in the way of his inherent
beliefs and loyalties. Murphy writes that in overturning a long existing precedent in a Second
Amendment case it was not a problem for Scalia, who was by now adept in manipulating
his originalist theory to reach the result he sought. In Bush v. Gore, Scalia assumed an
aggressive stance to convince his fellows to take the case on appeal from Florida, and to find in
favor of stopping the vote count to guaranty Bush the presidency. This was a low moment in
SCOTUS history as Justice Stevens noted: Although we may never know with complete
certainty the identity of the winner of this years presidential election, the identity of the loser
is perfectly clear. It is the Nations confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule
of law.
Scalia feels that textualism is the one true way to interpret the Constitution, all others being
merely theories held by judges. Once again, the true faith doesnt need to be proven. Most
scholars, whether lawyers, historians, or literary critics would say his textualism is just another
theory, and not a very good one, flawed like the pedantic Rev. Casaubons magnum opus, The
Key to All Mythologies, in Middlemarch. The Constitution for Scalia is static by intent, stating:
It certainly cannot be said that a constitution naturally suggests changeability; to the contrary,
its whole purpose is to prevent change
Justice Scalia. Perhaps Ruth Bader Ginsberg believes that inside the bully boy is some better
soul who, but for chance, could have been other than he is.
Murphy rightly notes that most justices regardless of party are philosophically pragmatist,
Monthly Archives
Select Month
considering the consequences of their decisions. How will this affect people in their dealings,
they ask; what outcomes will ensue? Roberts, Kennedy, and Souter are all of this stripe: judges
believing decisions need to function in the world of affairs. Scalia in this, like all things, begs
to differ.
One term the court has used in recent decades to overturn or modify decisions of bygone eras is
3 of 5
10/29/14, 5:29 PM
http://artsfuse.org/116106/fuse-book-review-associate-justice-a...
to invoke the notion of the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a
maturing society, as Justice Kennedy wrote for a 5-4 majority in the 2005 case of Roper v.
Simmons, holding the execution of a person under eighteen to be unconstitutional as cruel and
unusual punishment. The section of the Constitution which prohibits such punishments, but
nowhere defines what they might be, underscores the weakness of Scalias view. Capital
punishment for minors, whipping, and cutting off ears were all punishments which existed in
colonial times, and which the founding fathers were familiar with, but in not clearly stating
what is cruel or unusual specifically, leads to the inescapable conclusion that this was meant to
be left up to future judges to determine.
Scalia approaches age eighty in good health, determined to soldier on. Once he had hopes of
converting the court to his views, perhaps even becoming chief justice, but as that ship has
sailed he can only go on as he has. There is a trait called judicial temperament; less brilliant
people have been better judges because they possessed it. His only friend on the court is Ruth
Bader Ginsburg, who shares his love for opera. One imagines the tiny, frail, but steel spined
Ginsburg undisturbed by Scalias outbursts. Perhaps she believes that inside the bully boy is
some better soul who, but for chance, could have been other than he is.
Murphy observes in summing up that Scalia will continue to use his originalism and
textualism decision making theories, his traditionalism as dictated by his religious beliefs, and
his partisan conservatism, not always seeing how these are, at times, contradictory. This well
written biography leaves us believing that Scalia will be remembered as an idiosyncratic
footnote and a long serving anachronism who saw the law as an immutable object, not as a
force whose purpose is the advancement of civilization and the protection of the individual.
Thomas Filbin is a lawyer and freelance writer. His reviews have appeared in The New York
Times Book Review, The Boston Sunday Globe, and The Hudson Review.
Tweet
Like
Share
Tagged with: Antonin Scalia, Bruce Allen Murphy, Scalia: A Court of One,
Leave a Reply
4 of 5
10/29/14, 5:29 PM
Name
(required)
(required)
http://artsfuse.org/116106/fuse-book-review-associate-justice-a...
URI
Your Comment
b
link
quote
Submit Comment
Fuse Film Review: The Intriguing Documentary Art and Craft Getting Fuse Poetry Review: Gabriel, A Poem A
a Kick From Copying Art
5 of 5
Terrible Beauty
10/29/14, 5:29 PM