Scalia v. Scalia : opportunistic textualism in constitutional interpretation / Catherine L. Langford.
2017
KF8745.S33 L36 2017 (Mapit)
Available at Stacks
Formats
Format | |
---|---|
BibTeX | |
MARCXML | |
TextMARC | |
MARC | |
DublinCore | |
EndNote | |
NLM | |
RefWorks | |
RIS |
Items
Details
Title
Scalia v. Scalia : opportunistic textualism in constitutional interpretation / Catherine L. Langford.
Imprint
Tuscaloosa : The University of Alabama Press, [2017]
Description
xi, 162 pages ; 24 cm.
Series
Rhetoric, law, and the humanities.
Formatted Contents Note
Textualism as a response to the "living" constitutionalism
Textualism in Scalia's speeches and extrajudicial writings
Interpreting a clear clause : the Eighth Amendment's cruel and unusual punishments clause
Interpreting competing clauses : mediating religion between the establishment and free exercise clauses
When the Constitution is silent : rejecting the right to an abortion
Conclusion: Scalia's opportunistic textualism.
Textualism in Scalia's speeches and extrajudicial writings
Interpreting a clear clause : the Eighth Amendment's cruel and unusual punishments clause
Interpreting competing clauses : mediating religion between the establishment and free exercise clauses
When the Constitution is silent : rejecting the right to an abortion
Conclusion: Scalia's opportunistic textualism.
Summary
"An analysis of the discrepancy between the ways Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia argued the Constitution should be interpreted versus how he actually interpreted the law. -- Antonin Scalia is considered one of the most controversial justices to have been on the United States Supreme Court. A vocal advocate of textualist interpretation, Justice Scalia argued that the Constitution means only what it says and that interpretations of the document should be confined strictly to the directives supplied therein. This narrow form of constitutional interpretation, which limits constitutional meaning to the written text of the Constitution, is known as textualism. [This book] examines Scalia's discussions of textualism in his speeches, extrajudicial writings, and judicial opinions. Throughout his writings, Scalia argues textualism is the only acceptable form of constitutional interpretation. Yet Scalia does not clearly define his textualism, nor does he always rely upon textualism to the exclusion of other interpretive means. Scalia is seen as the standard bearer for textualism. But when textualism fails to support his ideological aims (as in cases that pertain to states' rights or separation of powers), Scalia reverts to other forms of argumentation. Langford analyzes Scalia's opinions in a clear area of law, the cruel and unusual punishment clause; a contested area of law, the free exercise and establishment cases; and a silent area of law, abortion. Through her analysis, Langford shows that Scalia uses rhetorical strategies beyond those of a textualist approach, concluding that Scalia is an opportunistic textualist and that textualism is as rhetorical as any other form of judicial interpretation." -- Publisher's website.
Bibliography, etc. Note
Includes bibliographical references (pages 145-154) and index.
Location
STA
Call Number
KF8745.S33 L36 2017
Language
English
ISBN
9780817319700 hardcover
0817319700 hardcover
9780817391607 electronic book
0817319700 hardcover
9780817391607 electronic book
Record Appears in