Antonin Scalia on Catholic Judges
What does Antonin Scalia, arch-conservative and arch-Catholic, think about such matters? Back in 2002, he wrote the following for First Things:
I pause here to emphasize the point that in my view the choice for the judge who believes the death penalty to be immoral is resignation, rather than simply ignoring duly enacted, constitutional laws and sabotaging death penalty cases. He has, after all, taken an oath to apply the laws and has been given no power to supplant them with rules of his own.
Of course if he feels strongly enough he can go beyond mere resignation and lead a political campaign to abolish the death penalty—and if that fails, lead a revolution. But rewrite the laws he cannot do.
Now, Scalia was only referencing capital punishment, but I’m sure that he would apply the same principles to other issues as well — abortion, same sex marriage, etc. A judge is permitted to have deeply held religious beliefs that run contrary to the law — after all, no one is obligated to agree with the laws all of the time. However, a judge also takes an oath of office to uphold the laws and legal precedents of the nation.
A judge who does not do this is breaking an oath, and that is not acceptable. Any time that legislators honestly feel that a nominee will not be able to uphold their oath because of religious or other beliefs, then they are justified in rejecting that nominee. This isn’t bigotry — and I think that Scalia would agree.
Unless, of course, Antonin Scalia is a hypocrite and only applies this standard when it comes to positions he favors. What do you think?
Separation of Church & State:
- Separation of Church and State 101
- Secularism 101
- What is the Separation of Church and State?
- Religion's Place in the Public Square
- Myths About Church/State Separation
- Church and State News
- Church & State Polls
Christian & Religious Privilege:
Comments
I think it’s true that judges must be able to uphold the laws, and that they are not there to make new laws. But I also think it’s important to keep in mind that judges do have some leeway, particularly in punishing and sentencing. This leeway is why Congress has felt it necessary to pass mandatory-minimum laws, for example, since some judges tend to hand out lenient sentences for minor drug convictions.
This is definitely a sticky topic though, with lots of gray areas.