Antonin Scalia

Antonin Scalia

Nonpartisan

Prior offices

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

---

Supreme Court of the United States

---

Education

Bachelor's

Georgetown University, 1957

Law

Harvard Law School, 1960

Personal

Birthplace

Trenton, N.J.

Associate Justice Antonin Gregory Scalia was the 103rd justice to sit on the Supreme Court of the United States. Republican President Ronald Reagan appointed him to the court on June 24, 1986 to replace Chief Justice Warren Burger. Scalia was confirmed in a 98-0 Senate vote and sworn in on September 26, 1986. He was the first Italian-American to be confirmed to the Supreme Court.

Scalia received a bachelor's degree in history from Georgetown University in 1957 and graduated from Harvard Law School in 1960. He worked at the international law firm Jones Day from 1961 to 1967, when he became an administrative law professor at the University of Virginia. In 1971, Scalia was chosen as general counsel for the Office of Telecommunications Policy by President Richard Nixon (R), a role he occupied until 1974. From 1972 to 1974, Scalia was the chair of the Administrative Conference of the United States. Nixon nominated Scalia for Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel, and he was confirmed by a Senate vote in August 1974. In 1977, Scalia returned returned to teaching and became a professor at the University of Chicago Law School. He also taught as a visiting professor in the Tulane University Law School summer abroad program.

Scalia continued to teach at the University of Chicago until 1982 when President Reagan nominated him for the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. He was sworn in on August 17, 1982.

Scalia's notable opinions include a dissent in Arizona v. United States (2012), the majority opinion in Kyllo v. United States (2001), and his dissent in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992). In his dissenting opinion in Arizona v. United States, he wrote that none of the four provisions of SB 1070 in question were preempted by federal law, but rather helped enforce the law more effectively and that invalidating the provisions undercut the sovereignty of the states. Danny Lee Kyllo v. United States was a case that involved thermal imaging used without a warrant to determine if marijuana was being grown inside of a private residence. He wrote in his majority opinion that since thermal imaging isn't a commonly used technology it is bound by the Fourth Amendment. In his dissent in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which affirmed the right of women to terminate a pregnancy without undue burden, Scalia wrote that the Constitution does not grant the right to have an abortion.

On February 13, 2016, Scalia "was found dead of apparent natural causes" while visiting "the Cibolo Creek Ranch, a resort in the Big Bend region south of Marfa," Texas, according to the San Antonio-Express News.

The U.S. Marshals Service notified U.S. District Judge Fred Biery of Scalia's death. Biery said, "I was told it was this morning. It happened on a ranch out near Marfa. As far as the details, I think it's pretty vague right now as to how. My reaction is it's very unfortunate. It's unfortunate with any death, and politically in the presidential cycle we're in, my educated guess is nothing will happen before the next president is elected."

Scalia's unexpected death created a vacancy on the Supreme Court. For more information about the process to fill Scalia's seat and members of Congress have said about Scalia and the future of the court, please visit the following pages:

• Supreme Court vacancy, 2017: An overview
• Neil Gorsuch
• Process to fill the vacated seat of Justice Antonin Scalia
• 2016 presidential candidates on the death of Antonin Scalia and the Supreme Court vacancy
• Members of Congress on the death of Antonin Scalia and the Supreme Court vacancy
• What happens to this term's major SCOTUS cases in a 4-4 split?

Professional career

• 1986-2016: Justice, Supreme Court of the United States
• 1982-1986: Justice, District of Columbia Court of Appeals
• 1982-1983: Chair, American Bar Association Conference of Section Chairmen
• 1981-1982: Chair, American Bar Association Section of Administrative Law
• 1977-1982: Professor, University of Chicago Law School
• 1974-1977: Assistant attorney general, Office of Legal Counsel
• 1971-1972: General counsel, Office of Telecommunications Policy
• 1972-1974: Chair, Administrative Conference of the United States
• 1967-1971: Professor of Law, University of Virginia
• 1961-1967: Attorney, Jones, Day, Cockley and Reavis

Scalia began his legal career at the Jones Day firm in Cleveland, Ohio, where he worked from 1961 to 1967. In 1967, he became a professor of law at the University of Virginia. He entered public service in 1971, working as the general counsel for the Office of Telecommunications Policy under President Richard Nixon. One of his principal assignments was to formulate federal policy for the growth of cable television. From 1972 to 1974, Scalia was the chair of the Administrative Conference of the United States. Following that, Scalia served from 1974 to 1977 in the Ford administration as the assistant attorney general for the Office of Legal Counsel.

Following President Ford's defeat by Jimmy Carter, Scalia returned to academia, first at the University of Chicago Law School from 1977 to 1982. He went on to serve as visiting professor of law at Georgetown University Law Center and teach at Stanford University. He also taught as a visiting professor in the Tulane University Law School summer abroad program. Scalia was chair of the American Bar Association's Section of Administrative Law in 1981 and 1982 and its Conference of Section chair in 1982 and 1983.

Early life and education

Scalia was born in Trenton, New Jersey. A practicing Roman Catholic, he attended Xavier High School, a Jesuit school in Manhattan. Scalia graduated first in his class and summa cum laude with a B.A. from Georgetown College (Georgetown University) in 1957. While at Georgetown, he also studied at the University of Fribourg, Switzerland. Scalia went on to study law at Harvard, where he was a notes editor for the Harvard Law Review. He graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law with an LL.B. in 1960, becoming a Sheldon Fellow of Harvard University the following year. The fellowship allowed him to travel throughout Europe during 1960 and 1961.

Approach to the law

Scalia was considered to be a core member of the conservative wing of the court. He was a vigorous proponent of textualism in statutory interpretation, an originalist in constitutional interpretation and a passionate critic of the idea of a "Living Constitution." In an interview with New York Magazine, Scalia commented on the growth of originalism:

“

For example, I truly thought I’d never see an originalist on the faculty of Harvard Law School. You know, everybody copies Harvard—that’s the big ship. There are now three originalists on the faculty, and I think I heard that they’ve just hired, or are considering hiring, a fourth. I mean, that’s amazing to me. Elena Kagan did that, and the reason she did it is that you want to have on your faculty representatives of all responsible points of view.

”

Judge Richard Posner disagreed with Scalia's strict practice of textualism and originalism. Posner used an anecdote to point out what he perceived as the flaw of strict textualism:

“

Scalia and Garner reject (before they later accept) Easterbrook’s warning. Does an ordinance that says that “no person may bring a vehicle into the park” apply to an ambulance that enters the park to save a person’s life? For Scalia and Garner, the answer is yes. After all, an ambulance is a vehicle—any dictionary will tell you that. If the authors of the ordinance wanted to make an exception for ambulances, they should have said so... One senses a certain defensiveness in Justice Scalia’s advocacy of a textualism so rigid as to make the ambulance driver a lawbreaker. He is one of the most politically conservative Supreme Court justices of the modern era and the intellectual leader of the conservative justices on the Supreme Court.

”

Scalia's coauthor Bryan A. Garner, in response to Posner's critique, wrote that Posner misrepresented their position:

“

My coauthor and I consistently maintain that ambulances are covered by the prohibition but also explain that “[s]ome of the imperfections [in a statute] can be cured or mitigated by doctrines and devices other than the mauling of text . . . . For example, it may well be that the undeniable exclusion of ambulances by the text of the ordinance is countermanded by an ordinance or court‑made rule exempting emergency vehicles from traffic rules.”

”

"Legally Speaking: Antonin Scalia."

C-SPAN, "U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia," July 30, 2012.

Martin-Quinn score

Scalia's Martin-Quinn score following the 2014-2015 term was 1.621, making him the second-most conservative justice on the court at that time. Martin-Quinn scores were developed by political scientists Andrew Martin and Kevin Quinn from the University of Michigan, and measure the justices of the Supreme Court along an ideological continuum. The further from zero on the scale, the more conservative (>0) or liberal (<0) the justice. The chart below details every justice's Martin-Quinn score for the 2014-2015 term.

Judicial nominations and appointments

United States Supreme Court (1986-2016)

President Ronald Reagan appointed Scalia to the court on June 24, 1986 after Chief Justice Warren Burger retired, and he was sworn in on September 26, 1986. In the swearing-in ceremony Reagan said that Scalia was a "brilliant judge" and referred to his previous legal experience: "He had a distinguished career as a lawyer and as a professor of law before joining the Court of Appeals nearly 4 years ago. There he became known for his integrity and independence and for the force of his intellect."

Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (1982-1986)

President Ronald Reagan nominated Scalia to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on July 15, 1982. Scalia's nomination was reported to the full Senate on August 4, 1982, and he was confirmed on August 5, 1982. Scalia left the court when he was elevated to the Supreme Court of the United States on September 17, 1986.

Supreme Court statistics

Opinions by year

Below is a table of the number of opinions, concurrences, dissents and splits (concur in part, dissent in part) that Scalia issued while serving on the Supreme Court, according to the data compiled by Cornell University’s Legal Information Institute.

	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016
Opinions	11	7	9	8	9	8	9	8	7	11	7	10	0	0	0	5	1
Concurrences	9	12	7	8	9	9	6	7	6	6	15	11	0	0	0	3	0
Dissents	8	9	10	11	10	5	4	8	5	3	6	5	2	0	2	6	2
Concur in part, Dissent in part	1	1	0	3	1	1	1	1	0	1	0	1	0	0	0	0	0
Totals	9	29	26	30	29	23	20	24	18	21	28	27	2	0	2	14	3

	1986	1987	1988	1989	1990	1991	1992	1993	1994	1995	1996	1997	1998	1999
Opinions	1	12	15	11	14	10	13	13	10	10	10	10	12	8
Concurrences	0	19	14	21	16	21	15	15	18	10	8	11	11	6
Dissents	1	10	10	8	10	12	13	1	6	5	13	6	12	5
Concur in part, Dissent in part	0	2	2	3	2	2	5	1	1	1	0	3	1	2
Totals	2	43	41	43	42	45	36	21	35	26	31	30	26	21

Frequency in the majority

In the 2015 term, Scalia was in the majority in 83 percent of decisions. He was in the majority more often than one other justice, the same as one, and less often than six other justices. In the 2014 term, Scalia was in the majority in 69 percent of decisions. He was in the majority more often than one other justice and less often than seven other justices. Since the 2011 term, Scalia has been in the majority more than 80 percent of the time three times.

Noteworthy cases

The noteworthy cases listed in this section include any case where the justice authored a 5-4 majority opinion or an 8-1 dissent. Other cases may be included in this section if they set or overturn an established legal precedent, are a major point of discussion in an election campaign, receive substantial media attention related to the justice's ruling, or based on our editorial judgment that the case is noteworthy. For more on how we decide which cases are noteworthy, click here.

• Kyllo v. United States (2001)      Judge(s):Antonin Scalia (Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. ____ (2001))	Click for summary→
Justice Scalia was the writer of the majority opinion in the case of Danny Lee Kyllo v. United States, a case that involved thermal imaging used without a warrant to determine if marijuana was being grown inside of a private residence. William Elliot, an agent of the United States Department of the Interior, used thermal imaging on Danny Kyllo's residence to determine if extra heat, that could imply the use of growing lamps, was coming from the house. Scalia wrote in his opinion that since thermal imaging isn't a commonly used technology it is bound by the Fourth Amendment. Scalia on the precedent: “ We have said that the Fourth Amendment draws "a firm line at the entrance to the house," Payton, 445 U.S., at 590. That line, we think, must be not only firm but also bright- which requires clear specification of those methods of surveillance that require a warrant. While it is certainly possible to conclude from the videotape of the thermal imaging that occurred in this case that no "significant" compromise of the homeowner's privacy has occurred, we must take the long view, from the original meaning of the Fourth Amendment forward. ”

• Arizona v. United States (2012)      Judge(s):Antonin Scalia (Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. ___ (2012))	Click for summary→
Justice Antonin Scalia wrote a concurring in part and dissenting in part opinion for the case of Arizona v. United States. The case involved the Arizona law that allowed officers to require anyone who was under arrest to present documentation to prove they were legal citizens. The law also allowed authorities to detain anyone they believed to be in the United States illegally without a warrant. The Court found that Arizona law preempted current federal laws in all cases except for the requirement of arrested people to present proof of citizenship. Scalia wrote that the assumption that the Arizona law contradicts federal law is false, and in actuality the Arizona law is in accordance with it. He said that the law seeks to enforce current federal law within Arizona's rights as a sovereign state. Scalia wrote in his dissent: “ Today’s opinion, ap­proving virtually all of the Ninth Circuit’s injunction against enforcement of the four challenged provisions of Arizona’s law, deprives States of what most would consider the defining characteristic of sovereignty: the power to exclude from the sovereign’s territory people who have no right to be there. Neither the Constitution itself nor even any law passed by Congress supports this result. ” Justice Scalia went on to argue that the opinion writer's assumption that the Arizona law contradicts federal law is false, and in actuality the Arizona law is in accordance with it. He comments that the law seeks to enforce current federal law within Arizona's rights as a sovereign state.

Supreme Court major cases by term

• Major cases of the Supreme Court October 2015 term
• Major cases of the Supreme Court October 2015 term
• Major cases of the Supreme Court October 2014 term
• Major cases of the Supreme Court October 2013 term
• Major cases of the Supreme Court October 2012 term

See also

• Supreme Court of the United States
• Supreme Court cases, October term 2020-2021
• History of the Supreme Court
• Major cases of the Supreme Court October 2015 term
• Process to fill the vacated seat of Justice Antonin Scalia
• 2016 presidential candidates on the death of Antonin Scalia and the Supreme Court vacancy
• Members of Congress on the death of Antonin Scalia and the Supreme Court vacancy
• Merrick Garland

External links

• SupremeCourt.gov

Footnotes

Political offices
Preceded by: William Rehnquist	Supreme Court 1986–2016	Succeeded by: Neil Gorsuch
Preceded by: Roger Robb	DC Circuit Court of Appeals 1982–1986	Succeeded by: David Sentelle