Recently Deceased Justice Scalia's Pungently Written Opinions

The conservative justice’s almost three decades on the court includes a legacy of sharply written opinions.

1. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA V. HELLER
   Protecting the Right to Bear Arms

   “Putting all of these textual elements together, we find that they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation. This meaning is strongly confirmed by the historical background of the Second Amendment. We look to this because it has always been widely understood that the Second Amendment, like the First and Fourth Amendments, codified a pre-existing right.” -2008

   Justice Scalia delivered the majority opinion for the court, citing his understanding of the historic context of the Second Amendment in judging Americans’ individual rights to bear arms. 

2. OBERGEFELL V. HODGES
   On Same-Sex Marriage

   “This is a naked judicial claim to legislative — indeed, super-legislative — power; a claim fundamentally at odds with our system of government. Except as limited by a constitutional prohibition agreed to by the People, the States are free to adopt whatever laws they like, even those that offend the esteemed Justices’ “reasoned judgment.” A system of government that makes the People subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy.” -2015
   

   In the 2015 case Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage throughout the nation, Justice Scalia angrily attacked the majority opinion from Justice Anthony Kennedy, saying that, while what laws say about marriage “is not of immense personal importance to me,” the justices in the majority had usurped the power of the people to govern themselves through the legislative process. 
   

3. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD V. NOEL CANNING
   Issuing a Rebuke to the President

   “The court’s decision transforms the recess-appointment power from a tool carefully designed to fill a narrow and specific need into a weapon to be wielded by future presidents against future Senates.” -2014

   Delivering a concurrence to a unanimous decision by the court more specifically defining the presidential power of appointments during recesses, Justice Scalia was skeptical how the defined time would be used by future presidents. 

5. LAWRENCE V. TEXAS
   The Culture War

   “Today’s opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct.” - 2003

   The landmark Lawrence v. Texas decision outlawed criminal penalties for homosexual acts. Justice Scalia’s dissent was a fierce retort that claimed the majority view “largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda.” He imagined the state laws that Justice Anthony Kennedy’s majority opinion might ultimately overturn, including prohibitions against “bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity.”

   “This effectively decrees the end of all morals legislation,” he wrote. 

6. KANSAS V. MARSH
   On Capital Punishment

   “It should be noted at the outset that the dissent does not discuss a single case — not one — in which it is clear that a person was executed for a crime he did not commit. If such an event had occurred in recent years, we would not have to hunt for it; the innocent’s name would be shouted from the rooftops by the abolition lobby.” - 2006

   Justice Scalia joined the majority in ruling that the State of Kansas’ death penalty law was constitutional. The state’s Supreme Court had struck down the law in 2004. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion, and Justice David Souter wrote a passionate dissent citing the exonerations after death penalty convictions, which he referred to as “hazards of capital prosecution.” Justice Scalia’s scornful response has been widely quoted as the number of exonerations in capital punishment cases has grown.
   

7. KING V. BURWELL
   On the Affordable Care Act

   “Perhaps sensing the dismal failure of its efforts to show that ‘established by the State’ means ‘established by the State or the Federal Government,’ the Court tries to palm off the pertinent statutory phrase as ‘inartful drafting.’ ” -2015
   

   In 2015, the Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care Act for the second time. Justice Scalia accused the majority of engaging in “interpretive jiggery-pokery” and said that the Court had gone to such extraordinary lengths to save the Affordable Care Act that “we should start calling this law SCOTUScare.” 

8. PLANNED PARENTHOOD V. CASEY
   On Abortion: Calling for Voters to Decide

   “By foreclosing all democratic outlet for the deep passions this issue arouses, by banishing the issue from the political forum that gives all participants, even the losers, the satisfaction of a fair hearing and an honest fight, by continuing the imposition of a rigid national rule instead of allowing for regional differences, the Court merely prolongs and intensifies the anguish. We should get out of this area, where we have no right to be, and where we do neither ourselves nor the country any good by remaining.” -1992

   In Planned Parenthood v. Casey, a 5-to-4 ruling upheld women’s right to an abortion but allowed states to impose some restrictions on the procedure. Justice Scalia, along with Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, dissented. He argued that while the states had a right to permit abortions, they were not required to do so. He further insisted that the issue should be resolved by the democratic process, instead of through the courts. Justice Scalia’s death comes just weeks before the Supreme Court is to hear oral arguments on another abortion-related case, Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole.