On the 40th anniversary of Justice Antonin Scalia’s swearing-in, reflections on his legacy reveal a pivotal moment in the American legal landscape—the revitalization of originalism and textualism. His tenure on the U.S. Supreme Court marked a distinct departure from prevailing interpretative trends initiated by the legal realist movement of the 1920s.
Justice Scalia’s bold move to advocate for a unique brand of originalism is encapsulated by a high-stakes address he delivered at Attorney General Ed Meese’s Conference on Economic Liberties on June 14, 1986, the day after meeting President Ronald Reagan for what was essentially a Supreme Court job interview. Scalia’s speech, contrary to being mild and deferential, directly confronted Meese’s support for a jurisprudence of original intent, which argued that judges should adhere to the Framers’ intentions. Instead, Scalia supported a focus on the “original public meaning” of legal texts, theorizing that what mattered was how the text was understood at the time of ratification by the general public, rather than the drafters’ intended meaning. This approach, relying heavily on contemporary dictionaries over classic works like The Federalist Papers, was considered at the time a significant risk given the political and career stakes involved.
Scalia’s approach was rooted in the belief that legislative history, pertinent to original intent, is often ambiguous and contradictory. He contended that the Framers themselves intended for judges to follow the original public meaning. This gamble, as recounted in an article on SCOTUSblog, ultimately paid off, as Attorney General Meese acknowledged the merit of these arguments, and Scalia was successfully nominated and confirmed to the Supreme Court by a unanimous Senate vote.
Justice Scalia’s nearly 30-year tenure remained dedicated to the principle of judges adhering to the original public meaning of legal texts, significantly influencing modern judicial philosophy. His legacy in shifting the judicial landscape and his relationship with contemporaries like Attorney General Meese offer insights into the intersection of jurisprudential principles and professional dynamics at the highest levels of the American legal system.