Posting Shortly: State Sen. Says CSCOPE Will be Yanked in Texas

As Heard on Beck Radio: Wait Until You Read that Poem By One of Those Punished for Benghazi Lapses

Education

‘It’s Dead, Dead, Dead’: Justice Scalia Blasts Schoolchildren Who Don’t Understand the Constitution

Jan. 29, 2013 2:30pm Mytheos Holt

Justice Antonin Scalia’s outspoken advocacy for originalism has on occasion reached controversial heights. Certainly, that may well be the case with his most recent comments, excoriating schoolchildren for misinterpreting the constitution (or, one supposes, for accepting their teachers’ willful misinterpretation):

On Monday, Scalia had a different target for his ire. He complained of schoolchildren who visit the Supreme Court and call the Constitution a “living document.”

“It’s not a living document,” Scalia said, according to the Dallas Morning News. “It’s dead, dead, dead.”

Scalia also suggested on Monday night that his strict interpretation of the Constitution sometimes forces him to write opinions that conflict with his personal beliefs.

This issue – that of the “living constitution” – has been a pet peeve of Scalia’s for a while. As far back as March of 2005, Scalia had attacked the idea of a “living constitution,” according to the Associated Press:

Justice Antonin Scalia criticized the Supreme Court’s recent decision to strike down the juvenile death penalty, calling it the latest example of politics on the court that has made judicial nominations an increasingly bitter process.

In a 35-minute speech Monday, Scalia said unelected judges have no place deciding issues such as abortion and the death penalty. The court’s 5-4 ruling March 1 to outlaw the juvenile death penalty based on “evolving notions of decency” was simply a mask for the personal policy preferences of the five-member majority, he said.

“If you think aficionados of a living Constitution want to bring you flexibility, think again,” Scalia told an audience at the Woodrow Wilson Center, a Washington think tank. “You think the death penalty is a good idea? Persuade your fellow citizens to adopt it. You want a right to abortion? Persuade your fellow citizens and enact it. That’s flexibility.”

“Why in the world would you have it interpreted by nine lawyers?” he said.

Scalia made similar remarks last year while speaking at Princeton University. Indeed, attacking the concept of a “living constitution” has become something of a staple in the Justice’s speeches, as has making controversial comments. Nevertheless, to hear him complain of its coming from the mouths of children is a new level of ferocity.

Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (200)

taintso
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 9:08pm
The Constitution gave rights to the people, and to the states, and limited the rights/power of the fed. And now everything is reversed? The feds take the power, dictate to the states and the people are at the bottom of the list paying for it all.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
RayGone
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 7:30pm
Your Demigod Raygun Gave Illegals Amnesty & Healthcare! EMTALA!,..

Puke Reagan gave full amnesty to 3 Million illegals in an obvious effort to break the farm workers union for all his old California grower buddies.

You might have forgotten because you were sitting there deaf dumb and blind while he and Ollie North sold Three Million Dollars worth of crack cocaine a day to pay for an illegal war in Central America at the same time?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- jman-6
  Posted on January 29, 2013 at 8:15pm
  No one ever said Reagan was perfect. That man walked the earth 2000 years ago and accended to the right hand of the Father! Anywho their is a big difference between governing and campaigning. And don’t forget The demonicRats controlled congress at the time so overall he did an excellent job especially restoring the power of the individual over the govt.! He one some and lost some but overall he saved this nation from a quicker demise and at least gave her an honest shot to survive!
  
  Report this comment
Mudd
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 7:02pm
The U.S. constitution is a product from the Age of Reason and the Democrat and – to a slightly lesser extent – the Republican parties hate it because reason and logic flies directly in the face of how they’re trying to train the people to bend to their will. The constitution deals with individual rights and individuals are a detriment to the community.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The Third Archon
  Posted on January 29, 2013 at 7:16pm
  Individuals ARE the community–the PROBLEM is the myopic conservative conception of an “individual” and their rights as an isolated atom separable from the community and distinct from the responsibilities to the other INDIVIDUALS (who outnumber them and whom they, like every individual in that community, are interdependent upon) that those rights are contingent upon. Conservatives seem to have based their philosophy on the absurd notion that the world is made up of a single individual. But the very CONCEPT of individual rights requires the limitation of the exercise of a “right” by a smaller number of individuals, where it harms the exercise of the rights of a GREATER number of INDIVIDUALS.
  
  Report this comment
- sapper
  Posted on January 29, 2013 at 7:56pm
  actually dumbass we believe that the right of the individual is more important that any benefit of collectivism. We believe that this is a Repuiblic not a democracy and mob rule is a detriment not a boon. I’m sure you understand that what you espouse is actually communism. Try reading the Federalist Papers and other writings of the founding fathers and you just might learn what this nation was meant to be and what they actually intended. It was not for the collective. The concept is that the community has no damned right to limit mine. To demonstrate: The collective liberals have decided that guns are evil and therefore wish to take them away. Our founders said the right to have and use weapons is a God given right. But people like you think it’s your perogative to limit that God given right. The peculiar thing is that people like you are too damned stupid to understand the hypocrisy. The men who wrote our Constitution said I have a God given right to defend myself from others including my own government if it becomes tyrannical. And since I mention that, got news for you. Read the Declaration of independence and you might notice that a lot of the grievances listed there can be applied to our own government now. Among them the confiscation of guns.
  
  Report this comment
- Ragnars Repos
  Posted on January 29, 2013 at 8:25pm
  @The Turd Archon
  
  “the responsibilities to the other INDIVIDUALS”
  
  Besides not interfering with these other individuals’ right to live for their own sake, what sort of slavery did you have in mind, sweetheart?
  
  “who outnumber them…”
  
  You couldn’t be a collectivist if you didn’t fancy mob rule.
  
  “the world is made up of a single individual”
  
  Do you experience someone else’s experience, i.e., see through their eyes, feel with their hands, think their thoughts, or just your own? FACT: The world IS made up of individuals–humanity happens one “I” at a time. There is no hive mind, Borgmeister. We humans survive separately–born separately/die separately.
  
  “But the very CONCEPT of individual rights requires the limitation of the exercise of a “right” by a smaller number of individuals, where it harms the exercise of the rights of a GREATER number of INDIVIDUALS.”
  
  Oh, I get it. Wherever two people are wrong and one person is right, wrong wins.
  
  Very wise idea, comrade. Where do I sign?
  
  Report this comment
JellyToast
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 6:52pm
The Supreme Court didn’t appoint Bush. Every time they counted the votes, Bush won.

Al Gore was the one trying to steal the election. Of course your college teacher didn’t tell you that. He wanted Al to steal it too.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The Third Archon
  Posted on January 29, 2013 at 7:21pm
  Except the time they counted the popular vote, when Gore when. And omitting the minor detail that the courts threw a wrench into the whole process of recounting (which was AUTOMATIC under then Florida law given the closeness of the result) by putting a stay on it, THEN declaring it should be ceased and the results sealed–so yes, in that sense, every vote tallied that we KNOW about and every vote using our undemocratic Presidential electoral methods DID put Bush ahead…
  
  And
  
  Report this comment
Gargent_Furball
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 6:45pm
There is no doubt that every court judge should know the constitution backward and forwards. And have it memorized.
Every school child who graduates from High School should have the Bill of Right and the Constitution Memorized. . That should be Law.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
asybot12
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 6:38pm
@ecinom (or what ever) The Catholic Church is not advocating abortion . A catholic school is and let me tell you having been educated in catholic schools they are infested with socialists to the rafters what a joke they are they wave in any wind that blows. I am glad I got out of that mess when I did and learned to think for myself ( as you clearly have not!)

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Rileydj
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 6:26pm
Impeach him! Failure to uphold the constitution!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
YOURSENSEI
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 5:58pm
This is what you ,use now:

Wow, first the GOOP gets a death certificate and now the Constitution. All you have left is Steve Doocy. Good luck with that.

It is so

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
The Third Archon
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 5:55pm
“‘IT’S DEAD, DEAD, DEAD’: JUSTICE SCALIA BLASTS SCHOOLCHILDREN WHO DON’T UNDERSTAND THE CONSTITUTION”
At least he didn’t do it TO schoolchildren–what an ass. I get his idiotic ideology, and he has every right to espouse it, but what the hell does he think he is accomplishing by making an ass of himself by attacking schoolchildren, whose opinion on jurisprudence is (1) rather inconsequential unless they should become judges; (2) will be much more thoroughly thought out if they DO decide to pursue a career in law; and (3) realistically CAN’T be expected, at their age and expertise, to be thoroughly considered.

Scalia is such a tool–thank humanity we’ll be rid of him soon.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
tootsie roll
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 5:38pm
@jrook
Justice Scalia has pimples SMARTER THEN YOU PEA BRAIN

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
paprtowl
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 5:25pm
it can be changed , but not the way obama does it . stand up .
Log in to Reply Reply
JohnGalt
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 5:13pm
The idea of a”Living Constitution” is one that changes over time because to Progressives (who strongly believe in a “Living Constitution”) who think the ideas of the founding fathers are outdated, want to ultimately change it.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on January 29, 2013 at 5:50pm
  i believe in a living constitution. i want a balanced budget amendment to the constittuion. I also would like to see a repeal of some other amendments
  
  progressives did not invent the term, therefore we should not bind ourselves by it
  
  Report this comment
TheHalfrican
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 5:13pm
My favorite Justice speaks again !

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
welovetheUSA
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 5:11pm
Your personal beliefs have no business in any laws of this land….period.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Southernsoul
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 4:43pm
How can you expect children to understand what they have not been tought?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
righthanddrive
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 4:29pm
This outburst is good for the country. It it good the children had to hear it. If there were children, then their teachers were present. So now at least in one school in this country children will ask question of their teachers and their parents. All of us who are parents could take this a step further – ask your kids what they ‘learned’ at school today…quietly, no fuss and you will be surprised at the response. Then you know what corrective action is necessary at the next parents day session.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
robcam817
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 4:26pm
Interesting comments from a man who himself it seems sometimes does not understand the constitution.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on January 29, 2013 at 5:04pm
  indeed
  
  Report this comment
blackfeather
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 4:23pm
and this s.o.b. is on the supreme court of the United States of America……unbelievable.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
JEANNIEMAC
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 4:22pm
When the judge said the Constitution was dead, I think he meant it is not capable of being evolved according to the whims of anyone.
The drafters of the Constitution had fought for freedom from the tyranny of a powerful king. They were very careful in the wording of each section. With this Constitution as the law of the land, the United States of America became the most powerful country in the world within 200 years.
We cannot, we will not allow radicals and one worlders to destroy us. Molon Labe.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Thundergod
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 4:17pm
All the children are insane

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
StargateSG1fan
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 4:08pm
At least school children have a few years of learning the constitution before they start passing laws.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
StargateSG1fan
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 4:06pm
Did he give this speech in the Senate building White House?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
mrunner
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 4:04pm
He may not have stated it eloquently- but I agree with him. The Constitution does not change without an official Amendment. Therefore it is “dead”. It does not evolve with the times except through Amendment. His point is that the constitution itself does not change and he is right. He is angered by those on the Supreme Court who believe that they can read into the Constitution things they wish it said, or out of the Constitution things they wish it did not say.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
2GodBeTheGlory
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 4:02pm
Actually the Supreme Court has made many changes to the constitution over the years that are against it. For instance, the speed limit on “national” highways that the state of Texas put forth in the 50′s. There is many court decisions that are inconsistent with the constitution, so the question is, how to we fix the problem? For instance, the 2nd amendment states that arms are not to be prohibited. However, we have the Supreme court recently state that governments both local and federal can make “reasonable” restrictions. People may sight the “restrictions” to free speech by the Supreme court, however, if you read the actual rulings, you would find that you can yell fire in a theater, but you MIGHT have consequences in making an obvious harmful situation. That is not “regulating” free speech.
Just like a government agency cannot “regulate” a Church or allow unrestricted “searches” without a warrant.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The Third Archon
  Posted on January 29, 2013 at 6:03pm
  “For instance, the 2nd amendment states that arms are not to be prohibited. However, we have the Supreme court recently state that governments both local and federal can make “reasonable” restrictions. People may sight the “restrictions” to free speech by the Supreme court, however, if you read the actual rulings, you would find that you can yell fire in a theater, but you MIGHT have consequences in making an obvious harmful situation. That is not “regulating” free speech.”
  
  You can split the semantics however you want–it comes out to the same thing. So by your own example, you CAN own whatever “arms” you want, but the state might enforce consequences for owning certain kinds of arms or how you acquire them if you DO. Alternatively, if you apply the reasoning I believe you are implying by saying “the 2nd amendment states that arms are not to be prohibited” (a debatable interpretation), then American governments CANNOT enforce legal consequences for, for example, shouting “fire” in a crowded theater when there isn’t one.
  
  Report this comment
- 2GodBeTheGlory
  Posted on January 30, 2013 at 5:08pm
  @The Third Archon
  
  If you had bothered to read what the ruling was, then you could possible understand that it’s not splitting hairs as you stated. It is about HARM to someone. If you can’t understand the difference then you could not understand the Constitution or what the founders wrote about in support of the bill of rights, nor how are system of government is supposed to work.
  I’ll try to break it down for you…..
  1. If you say something that DOES cause harm (and it is reasonably known that it would cause harm), you are to be held responsible – this is not REGULATING speech
  2. Owning a weapon and not causing harm is not bad and is legal as per our founders
  3. Police searching your house because they want to hassle you is BAD. Going to the court as an officer and bring real evidence or reasonable evidence to get a warrant good
  4 Government not able to make laws dealing with religion good. Prohibiting a church to setup because it’s not zoned “correctly” bad, hence why the local government is ALWAYS overturned when challenged in court.
  
  It is not the possession of a firearm that is bad, it is in it’s use.
  
  Report this comment
All Pro
Posted on January 29, 2013 at 3:58pm
Everyone fighting the good fight over at the Huffington post know Scalia is correct.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.