When I first saw the Politico breaking news alert informing me of the death of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia last week, I felt like someone punched me in the gut. For conservatives in the U.S., Scalia was more than an intellectual, consequential jurist and opera buff — Scalia was someone who championed the Constitution and our founding principles to their rightful extremes. The news of his death was tough for me.
In the middle of the 20th century, the Supreme Court was filled with justices who, in essence, made up Constitutional rights, the product of interpreting a “living Constitution.” Scalia quickly changed that. He advocated an original — and in my humble opinion, correct — interpretation of our founding document. Constitutional rights come from the principles our founders prescribed in the document. If there’s an issue that’s not expressly dealt with in the document, let the political process address it, not the judiciary. Not only that, but Scalia also played the long game well. I’d say his legacy doesn’t lie with his Supreme Court majority opinions. Truth be told, he was not a justice who was consensus-minded. He tended to have a my-way-or-the-highway judicial outreach. His dissents are more well-known than his majority opinions.
Scalia helped set up more than 200 Federalist Societies in law schools across the country that preach the gospel of judicial restraint and original interpretation — ensuring originalist thoughts will be preserved for generations to come. He also wrote his opinions for law students, again ensuring his views are preserved with new lawyers.
America lost a lion on the Supreme Court. Scalia was one of the greatest Supreme Court Justices in history — a fact that cannot be disputed. He will be missed, but not forgotten.
As a person who has actually read the Constitution, I can’t find the section that says Congress must confirm the nominations of the President. So, I’m not persuaded by the argument that Congress must reflexively do everything Obama says. Congress doesn’t have to entertain Obama’s Court pick. And do you know who agrees with me? President Obama, or to be more precise, Sen. Obama. He not only voted against confirming Chief Justice John Roberts to the court, but he also filibustered Justice Samuel Alito’s confirmation. Obama sounds like a Congressional Republican to me.
President Obama and Sen. Obama disagree with each other. But in the last year of his presidency, this isn’t the first time he differed with himself. The fact of the matter is, Congressional Republicans don’t have to confirm or hear Obama’s nomination. It’s not gridlock; it’s checks and balances. It’s prescribed in the Constitution. I would hope our Constitutional law professor-in-chief would know this by now. But then again, he might have changed his mind.
Like many college students and young people, I like reading right-leaning opinion magazines. Publications like National Review, National Affairs and The Weekly Standard give fantastic arguments and analyses of today’s news and events. They also give historical perspective.
A common feature of all of these magazines is a desire to get behind a rock-ribbed conservative presidential nominee. Someone like a Barry Goldwater or a Ronald Reagan. Someone who is conservative to the bone and champions free markets and a small federal government.
For some, Ted Cruz is this conservative. He has successfully defended the Constitution in the Supreme Court and champions conservatism. I don’t think many of my liberal friends appreciate how good Ted Cruz is on paper, policy-wise. His theatrics and presentation could be better. But I have to say I agree with his views on a majority of issues. Not only that, but I also know he will be a conservative lion in the White House.
In an age in which sort of self-loathing “conservatives” — McCain and Romney — win the nomination crown, I’m happy to see a person like Cruz resonating with a lot of voters.
Michael Beato is a UF political science senior. His column appears on Mondays.
