DOCSLIB.ORG

Antonin Scalia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Antonin Scalia ANTONIN SCALIA ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE UNITED STATES MEMORIAL TRIBUTES IN THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES VerDate Aug 31 2005 14:15 Mar 21, 2017 Jkt 098900 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6687 Sfmt 6687 H:\DOCS\SCALIA\98900.TXT KAYNE scourt1.eps Antonin Scalia VerDate Aug 31 2005 14:15 Mar 21, 2017 Jkt 098900 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6687 Sfmt 6687 H:\DOCS\SCALIA\98900.TXT KAYNE 98900.001.eps S. DOC. 114–12 ANTONIN SCALIA ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE UNITED STATES MEMORIAL TRIBUTES IN THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 2017 VerDate Aug 31 2005 14:15 Mar 21, 2017 Jkt 098900 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6687 Sfmt 6687 H:\DOCS\SCALIA\98900.TXT KAYNE scourt1.eps Compiled under the direction of the Joint Committee on Printing VerDate Aug 31 2005 14:15 Mar 21, 2017 Jkt 098900 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6687 Sfmt 6687 H:\DOCS\SCALIA\98900.TXT KAYNE Order for Printing Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- sent that Senators be permitted to submit tributes to Justice SCALIA for the Record until March 10, 2016, and that all tributes be printed as a Senate document. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so or- dered. [ iii ] VerDate Aug 31 2005 14:15 Mar 21, 2017 Jkt 098900 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6688 Sfmt 6688 H:\DOCS\SCALIA\98900.TXT KAYNE VerDate Aug 31 2005 14:15 Mar 21, 2017 Jkt 098900 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6688 Sfmt 6688 H:\DOCS\SCALIA\98900.TXT KAYNE FOREWORD On October 5, 2011, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing for the purpose of ‘‘Considering the Role of Judges Under the Constitution of the United States.’’ Justice ANTONIN SCALIA, who at that point had served on the Court for 25 years, was invited to testify. He began his remarks by telling the committee how he often asks law students what they think makes America a free country. Usually, he indi- cated, the response will be one of the ‘‘marvelous provisions of the Bill of Rights.’’ He then said this: But then I tell them, ‘‘If you think a bill of rights is what sets us apart, you’re crazy.’’ Every banana republic in the world has a bill of rights. Every president for life has a bill of rights. The bill of rights of the former evil empire, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, was much better than ours. I mean it literally. It was much better. We guarantee freedom of speech and of the press. Big deal. They guaranteed freedom of speech, of the press, of street demonstrations and protests, and anyone who is caught trying to sup- press criticism of the government will be called to account. Whoa, that is wonderful stuff! Of course, just words on paper. What our Framers would have called a ‘‘parchment guarantee.’’ And the reason is that the real constitution of the Soviet Union—you think of the word ‘‘constitution’’—it doesn’t mean a ‘‘bill’’ it means ‘‘structure’’: say a person has a sound constitution [you mean] he has a sound structure. The real constitution of the Soviet Union—which our Framers debated [our constitution] that whole summer in Philadelphia in 1787, they didn’t talk about the Bill of Rights, that was an afterthought wasn’t it—that constitution of the Soviet Union did not prevent the cen- tralization of power in one person or in one party. And when that happens, the game is over, the Bill of Rights is just what our Framers would call a ‘‘parchment guarantee.’’ So, the real key to the distinctiveness of America is the structure of our government. Justice SCALIA dedicated his life to the defense and preser- vation of that structure. He understood the role of the judici- ary and the role of the elected branches, and the need to re- spect the differences between and among them. He under- stood how the division of power among the branches pre- served liberty, and how encroachments or usurpations by one branch of another’s prerogatives threatened liberty. All Americans owe Justice SCALIA a tremendous debt of gratitude for his life of committed public service. Through 30 years of service on the Supreme Court he was always guided [ v ] VerDate Aug 31 2005 14:15 Mar 21, 2017 Jkt 098900 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6688 Sfmt 6688 H:\DOCS\SCALIA\98900.TXT KAYNE by a belief that Justices should determine what the language of our Constitution and laws require and render a decision based on those requirements, not their own preferences. Legislators, along with the constituents who elected them, should be particularly grateful for his recognition of, and commitment to, the principle that our system assigns the lawmaking power to the legislature, not the judiciary. This volume is a collection of tributes Members of Con- gress gave to Justice SCALIA following his tragic and pre- mature death last year. It is hoped the remarks herein con- vey our deep sense of gratitude for the life, work, and legacy of Justice SCALIA. Senator Roy Blunt Senator Chuck Grassley Chairman Chairman Committee on Rules and Committee on the Administration Judiciary [ vi ] VerDate Aug 31 2005 14:15 Mar 21, 2017 Jkt 098900 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6688 Sfmt 6688 H:\DOCS\SCALIA\98900.TXT KAYNE CONTENTS Page Order for Printing .................................................................................... iii Foreword ................................................................................................... v Biography .................................................................................................. ix Proceedings in the Senate: Tributes by Senators: Bennet, Michael F., of Colorado ................................................ 26 Blumenthal, Richard, of Connecticut ....................................... 22 Blunt, Roy, of Missouri .............................................................. 19 Boxer, Barbara, of California .................................................... 25 Cardin, Benjamin L., of Maryland ............................................ 22, 51 Casey, Robert P., Jr., of Pennsylvania ..................................... 35 Cochran, Thad, of Mississippi ................................................... 26 Cornyn, John, of Texas ................................................... 15, 19, 27, 51 Cotton, Tom, of Arkansas .......................................................... 33 Cruz, Ted, of Texas .................................................................... 46 Donnelly, Joe, of Indiana ........................................................... 26 Durbin, Richard J., of Illinois ................................................... 12, 24 Enzi, Michael B., of Wyoming ................................................... 18 Fischer, Deb, of Nebraska ......................................................... 31 Franken, Al, of Minnesota ......................................................... 21 Grassley, Chuck, of Iowa ........................................................... 7, 49 Hatch, Orrin G., of Utah ...................................................... 12, 25, 49 Heller, Dean, of Nevada ............................................................ 45 Inhofe, James M., of Oklahoma ................................................ 42 Isakson, Johnny, of Georgia ...................................................... 26 Klobuchar, Amy, of Minnesota .................................................. 17 Lankford, James, of Oklahoma ................................................. 33 Leahy, Patrick J., of Vermont ................................................... 11 Lee, Mike, of Utah ..................................................................... 21 McConnell, Mitch, of Kentucky ........................................ 3, 11, 22, 25 Murray, Patty, of Washington .................................................. 17 Reid, Harry, of Nevada .............................................................. 6 Rounds, Mike, of South Dakota ................................................ 50 Rubio, Marco, of Florida ............................................................ 28 Sessions, Jeff, of Alabama ......................................................... 36 Vitter, David, of Louisiana ........................................................ 34, 43 Warner, Mark R., of Virginia .................................................... 25 Wicker, Roger F., of Mississippi ............................................... 44 [ vii ] VerDate Aug 31 2005 14:15 Mar 21, 2017 Jkt 098900 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6687 Sfmt 6687 H:\DOCS\SCALIA\98900.TXT KAYNE Page Proceedings in the House of Representatives: Tributes by Representatives: Comstock, Barbara, of Virginia ............................................ 55, 65, 68 DeSantis, Ron, of Florida .......................................................... 65 Fortenberry, Jeff, of Nebraska .................................................. 60 Gohmert, Louie, of Texas ...................................................... 68, 78, 79 Goodlatte, Bob, of Virginia ........................................................ 57 Jackson Lee, Sheila, of Texas ................................................... 79, 80 Jeffries, Hakeem S., of New York ............................................. 79 King, Peter T., of New York ...................................................... 61 King, Steve, of Iowa ................................................................... 80, 81 LaMalfa, Doug, of California ..................................................... 53 McCarthy, Kevin, of California ................................................. 53, 54 Roskam, Peter J., of Illinois ...................................................... 63 Rothfus, Keith J., of Pennsylvania ..........................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Conservative Pipeline to the Supreme Court
    The Conservative Pipeline to the Supreme Court April 17, 2017 By Jeffrey Toobin they once did. We have the tools now to do all the research. With the Federalist Society, Leonard Leo has reared a We know everything they’ve written. We know what they’ve generation of originalist élites. The selection of Neil Gorsuch is said. There are no surprises.” Gorsuch had committed no real just his latest achievement. gaffes, caused no blowups, and barely made any news— which was just how Leo had hoped the hearings would unfold. Leo has for many years been the executive vice-president of the Federalist Society, a nationwide organization of conservative lawyers, based in Washington. Leo served, in effect, as Trump’s subcontractor on the selection of Gorsuch, who was confirmed by a vote of 54–45, last week, after Republicans changed the Senate rules to forbid the use of filibusters. Leo’s role in the nomination capped a period of extraordinary influence for him and for the Federalist Society. During the Administration of George W. Bush, Leo also played a crucial part in the nominations of John Roberts and Samuel Alito. Now that Gorsuch has been confirmed, Leo is responsible, to a considerable extent, for a third of the Supreme Court. Leo, who is fifty-one, has neither held government office nor taught in a law school. He has written little and has given few speeches. He is not, technically speaking, even a lobbyist. Leo is, rather, a convener and a networker, and he has met and cultivated almost every important Republican lawyer in more than a generation.
    [Show full text]
  • AP Government: Due Process & Roe V. Wade
    Social Studies Virtual Learning AP Government: Due Process & Roe v. Wade April 13, 2020 AP Government Lesson: April 13, 2020 Objective: LOR 3.B Explain the extent which states are limited by the due process clause from infringing upon individual rights. Warm Up: Write down your answer the following question. There are no right or wrongs here, but this is the focus of the lesson today! What is the right to privacy? What are 3 aspects of everyday life that it includes? Lesson: Roe v. Wade As this is a required case for the test, there are some ideas that are important to remember. Please write these down in your own words so you know what they are. Term Definition Due process The 14th Amendment clause guaranteeing that no state clause shall “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” The Supreme Court has interpreted the due process clause to provide for “selective incorporation” of amendments into the states, meaning that neither the states nor the federal government may abridge individual rights protected by the Constitution. Term Definition “Penumbra Derived from the Latin for “partial shadow.” The Supreme of privacy” Court has ruled that several amendments in the Bill of Rights cast a “penumbra” of the right to privacy, although the right to privacy itself is never explicitly named. For example, the Court has interpreted that the 4th Amendment right of the people to be secure in their houses from unreasonable searches and seizures implies a right to privacy in the home. Right to The right to be “left alone,” or to be free of government privacy scrutiny into one’s private beliefs and behavior.
    [Show full text]
  • President for Life, and Then Some - Nytimes.Com Page 1 of 2
    Letter from Africa - President for Life, and Then Some - NYTimes.com Page 1 of 2 • Reprints This copy is for your personal, noncommercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers here or use the "Reprints" tool that appears next to any article. Visit www.nytreprints.com for samples and additional information. Order a reprint of this article now. May 11, 2010 President for Life, and Then Some By HOWARD W. FRENCH In the months before his death in 1993 at the age of 88 (or, as widely rumored, as old as 100) and after 33 years in power, the president of Ivory Coast, Félix Houphouët-Boigny, fondly repeated a formula he had once announced publicly to the nation. “A king of the Baoulé has no right to know the identity of his successor,” he is reported to have said. Mr. Houphouët-Boigny may have belonged to royal lineage, but critics said he seemed to be forgetting that the Baoulé were only one of Ivory Coast’s 50 or so ethnic groups, and that he was the president of a would-be modern country. Few were fooled about the old leader’s real intention to rule as president for life, come what may in his aftermath. And the aftermath in Ivory Coast has indeed been grim. West Africa’s most prosperous country has been ripped apart by a civil war whose roots trace directly back to the contested circumstances of his succession, and the old regime has been replaced by a predatory authoritarianism under new leaders determined to hang on at all costs.
    [Show full text]
  • When Rosa Parks Died in 2005, She Lay in Honor in the Rotunda of the Capitol, the First Woman and Only the Second Person of Color to Receive That Honor
    >> When Rosa Parks died in 2005, she lay in honor in the Rotunda of the Capitol, the first woman and only the second person of color to receive that honor. When Congress commissioned a statue of her, it became the first full-length statue of an African American in the Capitol. It was unveiled on what would have been her 100th birthday. I sat down with some of my colleagues to talk about their personal memories of these events at the Capitol and the stories that they like to tell about Rosa Parks to visitors on tour. [ Music ] You're listening to "Shaping History: Women in Capitol Art" produced by the Capitol Visitor Center. Our mission is to inform, involve, and inspire every visitor to the United States Capitol. I'm your host, Janet Clemens. [ Music ] I'm here with my colleagues, and fellow visitor guides, Douglas Ike, Ronn Jackson, and Adriane Norman. Everyone, welcome to the podcast. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Great to be here. >> Nice to be here. >> There are four of us around this table. I did some quick math, and this is representing 76 years of combined touring experience at the Capitol. And I'm the newbie here with only a decade [laughter]. Before we begin, I'm going to give my colleagues the opportunity to introduce themselves. >> I'm Douglas Ike, visitor guide here at the U.S. Capitol Building. I am approaching 17 years as a tour guide here at the Capitol. >> Adriane Norman, visitor guide, October 11, 1988, 32 years. >> Ronn Jackson, approaching 18 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons Learned from Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
    LESSONS LEARNED FROM JUSTICE RUTH BADER GINSBURG Amanda L. Tyler* INTRODUCTION Serving as a law clerk for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in the Supreme Court’s October Term 1999 was one of the single greatest privileges and honors of my life. As a trailblazer who opened up opportunities for women, she was a personal hero. How many people get to say that they worked for their hero? Justice Ginsburg was defined by her brilliance, her dedication to public service, her resilience, and her unwavering devotion to taking up the Founders’ calling, set out in the Preamble to our Constitution, to make ours a “more perfect Union.”1 She was a profoundly dedicated public servant in no small measure because she appreciated just how important her role was in ensuring that our Constitution belongs to everyone. Whether as an advocate or a Justice, she tirelessly fought to dismantle discrimination and more generally to open opportunities for every person to live up to their full human potential. Without question, she left this world a better place than she found it, and we are all the beneficiaries. As an advocate, Ruth Bader Ginsburg challenged our society to liber- ate all persons from the gender-based stereotypes that held them back. As a federal judge for forty years—twenty-seven of them on the Supreme Court—she continued and expanded upon that work, even when it meant in dissent calling out her colleagues for improperly walking back earlier gains or halting future progress.2 In total, she wrote over 700 opinions on the D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • To Download Senator Rubio's Speech Transcript
    Remarks as Delivered to the Ronald Reagan Institute on April 30, 2019 By Senator Marco Rubio Thank you very much. Thank you, Fred, for inviting me, for introducing me, that’s very kind. I want to thank John Heubusch, Roger Zakheim, Rachel Hoff, and your colleagues at the Institute for giving me this opportunity and for organizing this event to mark the 35th anniversary of that speech, which you just saw a snippet of a moment ago. I wanted to spend today with you doing 3 things. The first, I wanted to talk about the historic significance of that speech, not just to U.S.- China relations, but to the cause of freedom and liberty around the world. Then I wanted to turn to the complex and challenging relationship today between China in the 21st century and our country. And third, some of the difficult choices we face with regards to that relationship. Let’s talk first about the speech. Some of you here today probably don’t remember that speech very well in 1984. I would have been in 8th grade. Actually, April 1984, I would have been in 7th grade. I remember that year only because it was Dan Marino’s second year and the Dolphins were a football team. But we’re coming back. Many people who work for me weren’t even born in 1984. But it was a part, as you said, of that historic six-day visit, and it was directed at the Chinese people. And the speech was typical Reagan. It overflowed with hope and optimism.
    [Show full text]
  • The Religious Affiliations of Trump's Judicial Nominees
    The Religious Affiliations of Trump's Judicial Nominees U.S. Supreme Court Religion Federalist Society Member Neil Gorsuch Catholic/Episcopal Listed on his SJQ U.S. Court of Appeals Amul Thapar Catholic Former John K. Bush Episcopal Yes Kevin Newsom Yes Amy Coney Barrett Catholic Yes Joan Larsen Former David Stras Jewish Yes Allison H. Eid Yes Ralph R. Erickson Catholic Stephanos Bibas Eastern Orthodox Yes Michael B. Brennan Yes L. Steven Grasz Presbyterian (PCA) Yes Ryan Wesley Bounds Yes Elizabeth L. Branch Yes Stuart Kyle Duncan Catholic Yes Gregory G. Katsas Yes Don R. Willett Baptist James C. Ho U.S. District Courts David Nye Mormon Timothy J. Kelly Catholic Yes Scott L. Palk Trevor N. McFadden Anglican Yes Dabney L. Friedrich Episcopal Claria Horn Boom Michael Lawrence Brown William L. Campbell Jr. Presbyterian Thomas Farr Yes Charles Barnes Goodwin Methodist Mark Norris Episcopal Tommy Parker Episcopal William McCrary Ray II Baptist Eli J. Richardson Tripp Self Baptist Yes Annemarie Carney Axon Liles C. Burke Methodist Donald C Coggins Jr. Methodist Terry A. Doughty Baptist Michael J. Juneau Christian A. Marvin Quattlebaum Jr. Presbyterian Holly Lou Teeter Catholic Robert E. Wier Methodist R. Stan Baker Methodist Jeffrey Uhlman Beaverstock Methodist John W. Broomes Baptist Walter David Counts III Baptist Rebecca Grady Jennings Methodist Matthew J. Kacsmaryk Christian Yes, in college Emily Coody Marks Yes Jeffrey C. Mateer Christian Terry F. Moorer Christian Matthew S. Petersen Former Fernando Rodriguez Jr. Christian Karen Gren Scholer Brett Joseph Talley Christian Howard C Nielson, Jr. Daniel Desmond Domenico Barry W. Ashe Kurt D.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record—Senate S6886
    S6886 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE October 31, 2017 that—exactly the opposite. She wrote EXECUTIVE SESSION preme court justices who were not ap- that if a judge’s personal views were to proved by Republican Senators to move impede that judge’s ability to impar- to the Federal bench: Lisabeth Tabor tially apply the law, then the judge EXECUTIVE CALENDAR Hughes from Kentucky, Myra Selby should recuse herself from the case. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under from Indiana, Don Beatty from South As the coauthor of that article and the previous order, the Senate will pro- Carolina, Louis Butler from Wisconsin, current president of Catholic Univer- ceed to executive session and resume Patricia Timmons-Goodson from North sity recently put it, ‘‘The case against consideration of the Barrett nomina- Carolina. Prof. Barrett is so flimsy, that you tion, which the clerk will report. Senate Republicans turned obstruc- have to wonder whether there isn’t The senior assistant legislative clerk tion of judicial nominees into an art some other, unspoken, cause for their read the nomination of Amy Coney form under President Obama. Yet Sen- objection.’’ Barrett, of Indiana, to be United States ator MCCONNELL, day after day, has It does make you wonder. Circuit Judge for the Seventh Circuit. said: ‘‘I think President Obama has To those using this matter as cover The PRESIDING OFFICER. The as- been treated very fairly by any objec- to oppose Professor Barrett because of sistant Democratic leader. tive standard.’’ her personally held religious beliefs, Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, Senator He comes to the floor now regularly let me remind you, there are no reli- MCCONNELL has come to the floor to to complain about ‘‘obstruction’’ of gious tests—none—for public office in complain about what he calls obstruc- Trump nominees.
    [Show full text]
  • The US Supreme Court and Criminal Justice Policy
    The University of Akron IdeaExchange@UAkron Akron Law Review Akron Law Journals July 2015 The mpI act of New Justices: The .SU . Supreme Court and Criminal Justice Policy Christopher E. Smith Please take a moment to share how this work helps you through this survey. Your feedback will be important as we plan further development of our repository. Follow this and additional works at: http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Judges Commons, and the Supreme Court of the United States Commons Recommended Citation Smith, Christopher E. (1997) "The mpI act of New Justices: The .SU . Supreme Court and Criminal Justice Policy," Akron Law Review: Vol. 30 : Iss. 1 , Article 3. Available at: http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol30/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Akron Law Journals at IdeaExchange@UAkron, the institutional repository of The nivU ersity of Akron in Akron, Ohio, USA. It has been accepted for inclusion in Akron Law Review by an authorized administrator of IdeaExchange@UAkron. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Smith: The U.S. Supreme Court and Criminal Justice Policy The Impact of New Justices: The U.S. Supreme Court and Criminal Justice Policy by * Christopher E. Smith I. Introduction The Supreme Court is an important policy-making institution. In criminal justice,1 for example, the high court issues decisions affecting institutions, actors, and processes throughout the justice system, from police investigations2 through corrections and parole.3 The Court's policy decisions affecting criminal justice are produced by the votes of the nine justices who select, hear, decide, and issue opinions in cases.
    [Show full text]
  • What Does Justice Scalia's Death Mean for Congress and the Nation?
    CRS Reports & Analysis Legal Sidebar What Does Justice Scalia’s Death Mean for Congress and the Nation? 02/16/2016 Over the weekend, the nation was shocked to learn of the passing of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. The death of the longest serving and, in the view of some commentators, most influential Justice on the current Court will have significant implications for the third branch of government. Justice Scalia’s absence may alter the outcome of several cases of interest to Congress pending before the Court and could mark a seismic shift in many legal doctrines, depending on who is confirmed to fill the newly vacant seat on the Court. The job of confirming the President’s nomination to fill the vacancy resides with the Senate, making Justice Scalia’s death likely to have a profound impact in both the short and long term on Congress. This sidebar, the first of several pending CRS projects on Justice Scalia and the new Supreme Court vacancy, provides an overview of the major implications of Justice Scalia’s death for Congress. Court’s Consideration of Cases in the Current and Future Terms Justice Scalia’s passing will undoubtedly impact the work of the Court in the near and long term. He brought well- known views regarding textualism and originalism to his consideration of cases before the Court. Textualism can be broadly described as a method of construing statutes and other texts that focuses on the plain meaning of the words used, affording little, if any, significance to extrinsic sources, like legislative history.
    [Show full text]
  • A Tale of Two Textualists: a Critical Comparison of Justices Black and Scalia Michael J
    College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository Faculty Publications Faculty and Deans 1994 A Tale of Two Textualists: A Critical Comparison of Justices Black and Scalia Michael J. Gerhardt Repository Citation Gerhardt, Michael J., "A Tale of Two Textualists: A Critical Comparison of Justices Black and Scalia" (1994). Faculty Publications. 990. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs/990 Copyright c 1994 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs ARTICLES A TALE OF TWO TEXTUALISTS: A CRITICAL COMPARISON OF JUSTICES BLACK AND SCALIA MICHAEL J. GERHARDT* The idea that Justices Hugo Black and Antonin Scalia have anything in common jurisprudentially is counterintuitive. Justice Black is associated with the progressive social and economic legislation symbolized by the New Deal and with judicial activism in protecting the poor and disen­ franchised.1 He is beloved by many liberals as a champion of individual rights, especially freedom of speech and of the press. In contrast, Justice Scalia is revered by conservatives as a true believer-combating the rising tide of liberalism, big government, and judicial activism-set on restoring traditional notions of federalism and judicial restraint.2 Any effort to liken these two Justices makes both liberals and conservatives recoil. * Professor of Law, Marshall-Wythe School of Law, The College of William and Mary. B.A. Yale University; M.Sc. London School of Economics; J.D. University of Chicago. I am grateful for the encouragement and helpful comments on earlier drafts I received from Marc Arkin, Erwin Chemerinsky, George Cochran, Neal Devins, Jill Fisch, Tracy Higgins, Michael Herz, Sandy Levinson, Chip Lupu, Tracey Maclin, John McGinnis, Peter Shane, Bill Treanor, Steve Wermiel, and Ron Wright.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer to Give UM Lecture
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana University of Montana News Releases, 1928, 1956-present University Relations 8-26-2002 Supreme Court justice Stephen Breyer to give UM lecture University of Montana--Missoula. Office of University Relations Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/newsreleases Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation University of Montana--Missoula. Office of University Relations, "Supreme Court justice Stephen Breyer to give UM lecture" (2002). University of Montana News Releases, 1928, 1956-present. 18010. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/newsreleases/18010 This News Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University Relations at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Montana News Releases, 1928, 1956-present by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The University of Montana UNIVERSITY RELATIONS • MISSOULA, MT 59812 • 406-243-2522 • FAX: 406-243-4520 Aug. 26, 2002 Contact: Shelley Hopkins, director of external relations, School of Law, (406) 243-4319. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE STEPHEN BREYER TO GIVE UM LECTURE MISSOULA-- The University of Montana School of Law will host its third member of the U.S. Supreme Court when Associate Justice Stephen G. Breyer speaks at the William B. Jones and Judge Edward A. Tamm Judicial Lecture Series. Breyer, the Supreme Court’s 108th justice, will give the sixth installment in the Jones- Tamm Lecture Series at 3 p.m. Wednesday, Sept. 11, in the University Theatre.
    [Show full text]