Statutory And Constitutional Interpretation

Superior Essays
Noting Justice Scalia’s work on Constitutional interpretation, two competing approaches will be discussed. According to Justice Scalia, there are four approaches to Constitutional interpretation: Textualism, Strict Constructivism, Legislative intent, and Living Constitution. However, the most prominent approaches to Statutory and Constitutional interpretation are textualism and living Constitution. Justice Scalia makes a case for textualism. He explains in his essay “A Matter of Interpretation,” that textualism is the proper approach to interpreting the Constitution. Justice Scalia adheres to the principle of reading the letter of the law rather than the intent of the law (Scalia 23). For many years the Supreme Court of United States has practiced …show more content…
Customary law is a system based on the interpretation of a court case, based on prior cases. This approach is called stare decisis (Scalia 4) which is deciding a case based on precedent. The practice of stare decisis is highly criticized by Scalia. Justice Scalia explains that the system of case precedent or common law review, has two main problems. The first one cited by Justice Scalia is that, common law review applied the law to the fact of a case. This is a problem because of the different nuances of every case presented before the judiciary. Scalia’s second objection to common law review is that it creates law (Scalia 5-6). This principle of stare decisis is flawed according to Scalia, because it sets the standard that one case will determine the next. Scalia uses the example of a painter who is contracted to paint his house. The painter, however, paints the house the wrong color. After that, the patron’s neighbor decides to sue in court for breach of contract. That case would be dismissed for “privity of contract” (Scalia 8), because the neighbor doesn’t have a claim to the case. As such, the principle of legal precedent can’t be applied to all …show more content…
He defines textualism as interpreting the Constitution based on what the statute means, not what it meant. He makes the distinction between a different approach to the Constitution: strict constructivism. Unlike textualism, strict constructivism reads a text strictly and not leniently. As an example of strict constructivism, Justice Scalia uses the case of Smith v. the United State (Scalia 23-24). In the Smith case the defendant purchased a quantity of cocaine, in exchange for a firearm. Although perhaps irrelevant, the gun was unloaded. However, the text of the statute provided an enhancement to the charges brought against the defendant. Said enhancement read “uses a gun” in the drug trafficking related crimes. Scalia claims that the court used a strict construction approach because the text “uses a gun,” was very vague. Conversely, textualism, according to Scalia, is not a literalist, neither a “nihilist” (Scalia 24). Other proponent of textualism, like Justice Clarence Thomas, refer to Legal Realism (O’Brien 219). Justice Thomas explains the same principles as Justice Scalia in reference to textualism. Thomas argues that text of the law cannot be altered to please people individually. Thomas, an African American, explains that sometimes he meets with young African American youth, and explains to them that the law should apply the same to everyone. He quotes the example of a referee of a

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    During the period of 1801 through 1817, the conflict of the Democratic-Republican views on the constitution were arguing against the ideas of the Federalists. The two parties believed in completely different ideas of how to interpret the constitution. Although the parties knew they must come to some agreement in how the constitution should be interpreted they both had some very good reasons there party was correct. The Democratic-Republicans believed in interpreting the constitution exactly.…

    • 411 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Under America’s first governing document, the Articles of Confederation, the national government grew weak and states operated like independent countries. In response to this the delegates at the 1787 convention which was originally set to ratify the Articles of Confederation devised a plan for a stronger federal government with three branches–executive, legislative and judicial–along with a system of checks and balances to ensure that no one branch would ever gain too much power. The U.S. Constitution established America’s national government and fundamental laws, while guaranteeing that certain basic rights for its citizens would be established and protected. It was signed on September 17, 1787, by delegates to the Constitutional Convention…

    • 1481 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Breyer clearly believes that the Constitution should be interpreted in a way that positively affects what is happening in society now. Society has changed since the Constitution was created over 200 years ago .Breyer also stated that he uses six interpretive tools when examining a case —text, history, tradition, precedent, the purpose of a statute, and the consequences (Lithwick ). Breyer obviously wants to make sure that his decision in a case does not have results that negatively affect society.…

    • 1934 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The United States Constitution is one of the shortest, longest standing, and most ambiguous constitutions in the world. This document establishes a democratic republic of many states under one federal government. In outlining the responsibilities and powers of each branch of the government and how they relate to state governments, many questions are left unanswered. Though this constitution outlines legislation’s role fairly clearly, it is far too vague concerning executive and judicial roles and the relationship between state and federal government.…

    • 1281 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Federalist Alexander Hamilton regarded the Constitution as the fundamental law, which is superior to any state statute, and as a limited Constitution. In Federalist Paper Number 78, Hamilton argues that the Supreme Court should have the authority to invalidate acts of Congress that are deemed unconstitutional, and that if there is a variance between the Constitution and a law passed by Congress, federal courts have the responsibility to follow the Constitution. Paper Number 78, having been cited in thirty-seven Supreme Court opinions as of April 2007, has had an immense influence on the debate regarding the interpretation and application of the Constitution (Coenen). Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is an advocate of textualism, arguing that the meaning of the Constitution lies in the words of the document, and that the Constitution should be regarded in favor of its “original meaning”. Justice Stephen…

    • 1154 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Scalia, on the other hand, is inclined to avoid using the tools of purpose and consequence because he believes they create subjectivity. Scalia also makes the argument that the meaning of the Constitution is not supposed to change generation to generation and that the open language of the Constitution is there for the legislative branch to create law, not for SCOTUS justices to make up their own laws based on the text. In the interview, Scalia argues against the Developmentalist approach. He even goes so far as to criticize it by comparing the Constitution to an empty bottle where each generation pours the liquid of its choice into it. Basically, Scalia’s argument centers around his belief that the Developmentalist approach results in judges reflecting their own morals their decision instead of remaining objective and sticking to what the text says.…

    • 770 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    This paper reflects upon the establishment of the Fourth Amendment, added as part of the Bill of Rights on December 15, 1791. From the colonial era to the establishment of the United States Constitution in September 17, 1787, Philadelphia. The implementation of the United States Supreme Court in 1789; under the Judiciary Act of 1789. The many challenges surrounding the notion that “Every man 's home is his castle” The Constitution of the United States: Fourth Amendment Rights…

    • 1756 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    A hot debate relevant for today is the question of how the constitution is to be interpreted. When writing the constitution, the founding fathers were clearly living in an ern which entailed concerns that are different from concerns today. During the constitutional convention, men discussed debated until they agree on what should become the framework for our great nation. Because of this the constitution appears to be ambiguous on many particular issues which we face today. Are we then to address those issues in light of the context in which the constitution was written, or are we to view it as a living document that’s meaning changes with time?…

    • 1027 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    In this model, judges act purely according to their own viewpoints, beliefs and preferences regardless of their court coworker’s reaction and response. For this reasons, this model of judicial behavior seems to lack theoretical consistency and reasoning. Judges’ policy preferences have a significant and possibly larger role in the judicial decisions making process (Ivers). Thus, legal considerations are also relevant in this process and cannot be ignored due to the fact that judges make decisions inside a legal framework.…

    • 1172 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Clarence Thomas Essay

    • 755 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Clarence Thomas was appointed to the Supreme Court to replace Thurgood Marshall, however, regarding his stances, Thomas is practically the “anti-Thurgood”. Thomas approaches constitutional interpretation of the law through the “originalist” perspective, meaning this “philosophy calls for interpreting the Constitution by looking to the words in the document” (American progress). Thomas is one of the many Roman Catholics sitting on the Court and is also widely considered the most conservative. Clarence Thomas had been said to have specific policy preferences closer to that of an extreme conservative. Thomas is anti-gay marriage and he is against affirmative action.…

    • 755 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    J. Cecelia Shaulis April 13, 2015 Pols-Y 211 Dalecki Exam 3- Miranda v. Arizona One of the biggest players in law interpretation and policy-making is the judiciary system. While the other two branches of government have some control over the judiciary system through checks and balances, the federal courts have a great deal of power in the form of judicial review. Judicial review is the authority of the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution.…

    • 1238 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Originalism v. Judicial Activism Throughout the history of the United States of America, there has always been different controversies among our Constitution. To the best of their abilities the Supreme Court of the United States has resolved each of these cases in a manner relating to interpreting the Constitution. Judicial activism and judicial restraint have been at odds since the adoption of our Constitution in 1787. This continues to this time where the Supreme Court is still ruling on cases that affect our everyday lives.…

    • 1522 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The confirmation battles over recently nominated justices certainly suggest that many people view the justices’ personal politics as an important factor in judicial decision-making. But we should not so quickly conclude that Supreme Court justices, like politicians, merely try to institute their own policy preferences. A number of factors complicate the analysis. First, it is difficult to disentangle a justice’s political preferences from his or her…

    • 1170 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The courts biggest issues were trying to decide whether a trial court’s erroneous deprivation of a criminal defendant’s choice of counsel entitles him to a reversal of his conviction and should proving the sixth Amendment right to proceed with the counsel of choice depend on whether the deprivation of that right also resulted in compromising a defendants’ right to a fair trial. The majority opinion did not apply the Strickland test because they felt that the defendant could not show or give any reason as to why he felt the counsel was ineffective and that the counsels performance was poorly presented and deficient and the defendant was prejudiced by it. What the Strickland test is actually intended for is that the government must contend that the defendant must at least demonstrate that his counsel of choice would have pursued a different strategy and would have created a :reasonable probability”. In court cases the course can be split into two structures; trial errors and structural errors. Most constitutional errors are trial errors that occur “during the presentation to the jury,” and courts have discretion in deciding whether these trial errors are harmless and warrant a new trial.…

    • 556 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Let us now consider the other side of the coin, the argument in favor of a dead Constitution. In 2008; Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said at the Manhattan Institute, "Let me put it this way; there are really only two ways to interpret the Constitution -- try to discern as best we can what the framers intended or make it up. No matter how ingenious, imaginative or artfully put, unless interpretive methodologies are tied to the original intent of…

    • 1139 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays