Travel Journal

Justice Scalia:

...I dissent on this point. I have to tell you. It is not a question of the country disobeying the decisions of the Court. Thats not what is going on. But, I think what is going on is unprecedented in the difficulty of getting judicial nominations confirmed.

I was nominated almost twenty years ago. I was known to be conservative in my policy views, But, I was known to be a good lawyer, an honest man, somebody who could be fair and write an intelligent opinion [Russert interrupts you were confirmed 98-0] I was confirmed unanimously by the Senate . . .

Now, something something very fundamental has changed. What we originalists think has changed and we have been saying this for a long time. You cannot adopt a theory that the Constitution is evolving and the Supreme Court will tell you what it means from age to age. You cannot do that without causing the Supreme Court to become a very political institution. And when that happens, the people in a democracy will try to seize control of it. They will realize that it is nice to have good lawyers up there, but that is not the main object. Basically, we want people up there who will evolve the Constitution the way we want it evolved.

Now, you dont have to worry about that for originalists. Our constitution doesnt evolve. It means what it meant. But, if you have an evolving constitution somebody is going to have to decide. And I think what has happened is that after about fifty or sixty years of an evolving constitution, the people have come to realize what is going on . That the people they are selecting, not just for the Supreme Court but even for the courts of appeals, have enormous policy discretion. And, I think that is what is going on.

Judges have become political entities. Much more than they ever were. But look, this is an originalist view and my colleagues probably dont agree with it. Certainly, dont agree with it.

- source

From the “U.S. Supreme Court Justices Interview with Tim Russert” (04/21/2005)