iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Justice Scalia: Lawmakers Need To Get Familiar With Federalist Papers

Scalia Tea Party Constitution

HENRY C. JACKSON   01/24/11 10:22 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia says members of Congress need to get themselves a copy of the Federalist Papers – and make sure they read it.

Scalia made the short walk from the Supreme Court to the Capitol on Monday to speak at a seminar organized by GOP Rep. Michele Bachmann and the Tea Party Caucus. In remarks closed to the media, Scalia told about 50 members of Congress and their staff to "pay attention" and read up on their roles. Attendees described the associate justice as professorial and occasionally playful.

"He said we should all get a copy of the Federalist Papers and read it, underline it and dog-ear it," said Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., who attended the event.

Scalia's lecture had drawn criticism and taken on an air of mystery because of the prohibition on media coverage. Liberal groups in particular hammered Scalia for associating with the Republican-leaning Tea Party movement, saying it displayed a clear bias.

Members of both parties, though, described Monday's lecture as a fairly bland affair, one heavy on legal and Constitutional banter and virtually devoid of discussion on the hot button issues of the day.

"I didn't get the sense that this was skewed at all," said Schakowsky, an outspoken liberal. She deadpanned: "This was a discussion at a very high level. There were lots of Latin phrases being used."

Freshman Rep. Bill Huizenga, R-Mich., said Scalia was careful to veer away from current events or matters that could come before the court. Instead, Huizenga said, the Justice outlined his own, already well-annunciated views on the Constitution. Huizenga and other attendees said Scalia reiterated his view that the Constitution is not a living document. And, Huizenga said, Scalia did so in his own trademark style.

"It's established that he has a very wicked sense of humor, he displayed that a little bit," Huizenga said.

Bachmann called Scalia's appearance a success and said she was particularly pleased it was a bipartisan event. She said she counted at least three Democratic members in the audience. Scalia is the first attendee in what Bachmann said will be a regular series of lectures for members on the Constitution and the role of Congress.

Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., said Scalia repeated and amplified legal views he had heard from the associate justice before.

"It was Justice Scalia's explication of his views," said Nadler. "They are well established."

Still, the off-the-record nature of Scalia's lecture provoked curiosity. Dozens of reporters gathered outside a conference room in the Capitol Visitor's Center and, for a moment, the door to the room was left open, allowing those outside the room to hear what was being said. Scalia was introduced by Bachmann. Then came the sound of his voice.

"Look, I'm going to tell you some things" Scalia began, but then staff shut the door.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON — Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia says members of Congress need to get themselves a copy of the Federalist Papers – and make sure they read it. Scalia made the short walk ...
WASHINGTON — Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia says members of Congress need to get themselves a copy of the Federalist Papers – and make sure they read it. Scalia made the short walk ...
Filed by Elyse Siegel  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,875
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (42 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ocatty
01:24 PM on 03/06/2011
It's surprising that this ultra partisan idealogue didn't come out and say what he really meant: that he thinks everyone should become intimately familiar with The Federalist SOCIETY!
08:11 AM on 02/19/2011
Seems to me inappropriate for a Supreme Court Justice to stroll to the capital building to speak at a seminar.
Was he a compensated attendee? If so, paid by whom? If not, was it an attempt at intimidation of influence?
Do we pay our Supreme Court Justices to teach t-party lawmakers at the capital? Or any lawmakers in the Capital Building?
06:23 PM on 01/26/2011
His visit may have been innocent; however, it has lead to questioning which leads to a problem. Add this, backroom closed meeting to him and Thomas attending a fundraiser with the Chamber of Congress and other partisan events that both have attended leaves one to question whether he is apolitical or political.

Personally, I think that he, along with Thomas are activist Justices!
03:15 PM on 01/26/2011
HE SHOULD BE IMPEACH HE IS A THREAT TO WOMEN RIGHTS SAYING WOMEN RIGHTS ARE NOT COVER BY THE CONSTITUTION.
HE SHOULD BE REMINDED THAT THIS IS 2OII NOT 1776.
01:21 PM on 01/26/2011
So lets see where we are at.

1.. APPOINTED FOR LIFE SUPPREME COURT JUSTICES, involved in partisan politics.
ELECTED OFFICIALS FROM THE PRESIDENT ON DOWN. Taking part and involved with
private INTERNATIONAL groups, like the C.F.R., Bilderberg, I.M.F, THE GROUP

OF 8, THE FIVE PLUS ONE, and other PRIVATE national and international CORPORATIONS. BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. WHICH is ILLEGAL. According to the framers.

2..THE PATRIOT ACT. EFFECTIVELY places items "2" "3" "4" "7" "9" in the inside the graves and under the bones of all true PATRIOTS who have perished trying to protect them.

3.. Item number "6" NULLIFIED by By a group of International Bankers and their wealthy cohorts when they bribed certain members of congress, and utilized nefarious means to confuse and mislead the sitting president and the American people by sneaking thru and ratification of "THE FEDERAL REVERVE ACT" during the Xmas holidays in the year 1913.
01:20 PM on 01/26/2011
I'm "REALLY FED UP" PART ONE OF TWO Conduct the framers did "NOT" want to happen.

1. .Elected Officials and their, Appointee's < = "JUDGES" etc. meeting with CEO's of private corporations behind closed doors discussing and making agreements on matters of state, public policy and law.
2.. Any changes to Habeas Corpus. Pretty straight forward. "HANDS OFF"
3.. Unwarranted Illegal searches and seizures, Invasion of privacy, quick and speedy trials, face your accusers, of your peers. innocent until proven guilty, bail, self incrimination, "ABSOLUTELY HANDS OFF"
4.. Tampering with Freedom of speech and press. "UNTOUCHABLE"
5.. The right to keep and bare arms. "HANDS OFF"
6.. NO CHANGES TO The management and control of minting the nations money. "ASSIGNED TO CONGRESS" as part of their "JOB DESCRIPTION"
7.. Taxation and the collection of. "WITH GUIDANCE" and SPECIFICS". The intent was. "KEEP IT LIMITED" Pay for a "PERMANENT" robust Navy FOR DEFENSE OF OUR SHORES AND BORDERS, And an Army "ONLY IN TIME of WAR".
8.. NO marriage of church and state. "STRAIGHT FORWARD ENOUGH"
9.. Three individual branches of government. Each to serve a purpose and PROVIDE CHECKS AND BALANCES over the other two. "BRILLIANT CONCEPT and well DEFINED"

Continued in part 2. WHAT DO THE FRAMERS WIND UP WITH?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mjc
Avoid printing any..
10:11 AM on 01/26/2011
Justice Scalia needs to become familiar with the United States' Constitution. The Federalist Papers were written to explain to various and sundry how this section and why that section of the Constitution were written and gives one a real understanding of the conflicts in ideology at the convention as well as how they were solved. Scalia and Thomas and probably Roberts too only care about their version of the writing. The Federalists were the more conservative of the contributors but they weren't as stone-headed as the three we have on the Court today.
photo
markie G
...all 6's, 7's + 9's
12:32 AM on 01/26/2011
i'll tell ya what, justice scalia, i'll make ya a deal--i'll read the federalist papers---if you read the constitution

K?
11:54 PM on 01/25/2011
Refreshing.

A Supreme Court Justice with an ounce of care that the Americans think about the constitution. Here is hoping there may be more of that.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nicnack74
Pragmatic Optimist
08:51 AM on 02/04/2011
Should be interesting, should they actually read it. I do believe it's Federalist Papers 10 that deals with the "dangers of factions". Perhaps they might be driven to compromise.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Peter Boehringer
Dona nobis pacem
10:18 PM on 01/25/2011
Do the teapartyers know that Alexander Hamilton was not born in America, but the Caribbean. Shouldn't the birthers be all over this? Sounds like a conspiracy to me.
05:14 AM on 01/27/2011
Did anyone ever tell you that Alexander Hamilton was never president and it's the only office you need to be a natural citizen to hold.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Peter Boehringer
Dona nobis pacem
07:44 AM on 01/27/2011
Did I say he was a president? No.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Larry Motuz
More prayers, fewer preyers.
10:15 PM on 01/25/2011
Since Scalia has, over and over again, questioned the validity of constitutional amendments and settled legal opinion, he should be impeached.
08:55 PM on 01/25/2011
scalia is one bright dude. but he realistically knows a lot of the newly elected tea party people are not. most polititians are fully aware of, and what comprises the federalist papers. seems like a warning to tp-ers to make sure they don't make themselves appear too foolish or dumb. like it or not readers it is the conservatives moment to shine. and scalia knows it too well.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
margoharris
I used to be Snow White but I drifted.
08:24 PM on 01/25/2011
There were conservatives, called Federalists, and liberals, called Democratic Republicans. Federalist then, as now, supported a ruling elite over ordinary citizens. They didn't even pretend they believed in a constitutional republic. Some Federalists wanted to appoint George Washington King for life!
They proposed the first privately held National Bank by which they ran up a national debt owed to private lenders that's analogous to the what happens with our Federal Reserve. The Federalists were forced to change their political identity after they backed ENGLAND in the War of 1812....and England lost. They were traitors then and now!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
blueman00009
It is what it is
10:35 PM on 01/25/2011
Pretty much sums it up. That's why republics are all over the federalist papers and hamilton. Federalist politics fits their agenda.
09:22 PM on 01/26/2011
Margo,
"Federalist then, as now, supported a ruling elite over ordinary citizens. They didn't even pretend they believed in a constitutional republic."

The key, however, is what the states agreed to and what their intentions were prior to ratification. Pennsylvania and Vermont, as I've said many times, almost withdrew because of their insistence upon the Second Amendment. Their wording in their respective initial drafts were even more supportive of the 2nd Amendment than what was finally agreed to. The agreed to the current version because of the relationship between the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 9th & 10th Amendments. Together, there was no way that the states could "legally" be overtaken by the federal government. That should tell you something.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
margoharris
I used to be Snow White but I drifted.
11:12 PM on 01/26/2011
I read your comment 3 times and I do not know what the he// you are talking about....sorry.
08:20 PM on 01/25/2011
Republican lawmakers need to be familiar with Alexander Hamilton as well. Hamilton was challenged to a duel by Aaron Burr, and as he lay dying it was clear he had fired no bullet, despite having time to do so, and said it had not been his intention to fire one. This man, who wrote the Federalist papers, is a far better example of behavior than those who declare people should read what he wrote.
09:37 PM on 01/26/2011
Hamilton also wasn't playing by the rules in choosing to fire off to the side, or 'throwing his shot'. Hamilton, historians suggest, actually fired the first round, but if he had intended to throw his shot, hadn't indicated that he was going to do so to Burr, who believed the duel to be genuine. It seems that Hamilton had brought the pistols, used oversized shot, and had reduced the trigger pull on his pistol to a fraction of what was normal on Burr's pistol.

His own arrogance did him in.
08:14 PM on 01/25/2011
if the conny is outdated....what can you say about the so-called federalist papers---which really have no bearing on how our president rules the country today.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hershobr
10:24 PM on 01/25/2011
Neither is outdated. They are the framework for how our government is set-up and operates, and are extremely important in understanding the vision that the founders had for our government and country.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
blueman00009
It is what it is
10:36 PM on 01/25/2011
The constitution is totally out of date, especially in light of how the republic party has been twisting and distorting it. It should be tossed and rewritten. Now we just have republic presidents, like bush, and congress people, like mcconnell, ignoring it. Why not redo it, as opposed to just ignoring it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
olerealist
retired trial attorney; former member of VA abd Wa
06:16 PM on 01/26/2011
Scalia is welcome to read the “Federalist --” all day long so so long as he does so by candlelight in the privacy of his judicial chambers.