Justice Scalia: Textualism v. Technology
Date
2012-05
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
University of Delaware
Abstract
Throughout his legal career, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has attempted to champion a style of textual interpretation that examines the original meaning of the text in question. In particular the Constitution of the United States is most often scrutinized through different lenses of interpretation. Scalia argues that his textual originalist manner of interpretation will provide the most objective outcomes in relation to other modes of interpreting texts like the Constitution. This thesis examines the objectivity and legitimacy of Scalia’s textual originalism in relation to Fourth Amendment technology cases. These cases deal with issues that the Framers of the Constitution could have never foreseen, which will always be an issue when trying to apply the “original” meaning of an eighteenth century text. The precedent for Fourth Amendment technology cases that has been set over the past five decades has amalgamated into an almost incoherent doctrinal mess that has made very difficult deciding future cases according to precedent, as courts are expected to do. Justice Scalia’s own decisions within these cases have contributed to the confusion of precedent.
Two of the most important Fourth Amendment technology opinions were written by Scalia, one of which fails to appropriately apply the philosophy he advocates for and the most recent that actually follows his textual originalism but fails to address important privacy concerns. These opinions continue to confuse the Fourth Amendment precedent and question the applicability of using textual originalism in such contemporary cases. Ultimately, Scalia’s application of textual originalism proves to be as subjective as other modes of interpretation, logically questionable and even when it is accurately applied, fails to address privacy concerns associated with the Fourth Amendment.
Description
Keywords
Antonin Scalia, textual originalism, Fourth Amendment, privacy concerns, technology legal cases