Antonin scalia family tree

US Supreme Court justice from to

"Scalia" redirects here.

Antonin scalia grandchildren That vote followed Rehnquist's confirmation as Chief Justice by a vote of 65—33 on the same day. Scalia's opinions drew the attention of Reagan administration officials, who, according to The New York Times , "liked virtually everything they saw and Vinson — , cases Earl Warren — , cases Warren E. Carr was the last majority opinion written by Justice Scalia before his death in February , though his last dissenting opinion was in FERC v.

For the surname, see Scalia (surname).

Antonin Scalia
Official portrait,
In office September 26, &#;– February 13,
Nominated by	Ronald Reagan
Preceded by	William Rehnquist
Succeeded by	Neil Gorsuch
In office August 17, &#;– September 26,
Nominated by	Ronald Reagan
Preceded by	Roger Robb
Succeeded by	David Sentelle
In office August 22, &#;– January 20,
President	Gerald Ford
Preceded by	Roger C. Cramton
Succeeded by	John Harmon
In office September &#;– August
President	Richard Nixon
Preceded by	Roger C. Cramton
Succeeded by	Robert Anthony
Born	Antonin Gregory Scalia ()March 11, Trenton, New Jersey, U.S.
Died	February 13, () (aged&#;79) Presidio County, Texas, U.S.
Resting place	Fairfax Memorial Park
Spouse	Maureen McCarthy &#; (m.&#;)&#;
Children	9, including Eugene
Education
Awards
Signature

Antonin Gregory Scalia^{[n 1]} (March 11, &#;– February 13, )^{[n 2]} was an American jurist who served as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from until his death in He was described as the intellectual anchor for the originalist and textualist position in the U.S.

Supreme Court's conservative wing. For catalyzing an originalist and textualist movement in American law, he has been described as one of the most influential jurists of the twentieth century,^[7] and one of the most important justices in the history of the Supreme Court.^[8] Scalia was posthumously awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in , and the Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University was named in his honor.

Scalia was born in Trenton, New Jersey. A devout Catholic, he attended the Jesuit Xavier High School before receiving his undergraduate degree from Georgetown University. Scalia went on to graduate from Harvard Law School and spent six years at Jones Day before becoming a law professor at the University of Virginia.

In the early s, he served in the Nixon and Ford administrations, eventually becoming an assistant attorney general under President Gerald Ford. He spent most of the Carter years teaching at the University of Chicago, where he became one of the first faculty advisers of the fledgling Federalist Society. In , President Ronald Reagan appointed Scalia as a judge of the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Antonin scalia wife

Antonin scalia family pictures

Maureen scalia wikipedia

Four years later, Reagan appointed him to the Supreme Court, where Scalia became its first Italian-American justice following a unanimous confirmation by the U.S. Senate 98–0.^{[n 3]}

Scalia espoused a conservative jurisprudence and ideology, advocating textualism in statutory interpretation and originalism in constitutional interpretation.

He peppered his colleagues with "Ninograms" (memos named for his nickname, "Nino") intending to persuade them to his point of view. He was a strong defender of the powers of the executive branch and believed that the U.S. Constitution permitted the death penalty and did not guarantee the right to either abortion or same-sex marriage.

Furthermore, Scalia viewed affirmative action and other policies that afforded special protected status to minority groups as unconstitutional. Such positions would earn him a reputation as one of the most conservative justices on the Court. He filed separate opinions in many cases, often castigating the Court's majority—sometimes scathingly so.

Scalia's most significant opinions include his lone dissent in Morrison v. Olson (arguing against the constitutionality of an Independent-Counsel law), and his majority opinions in Crawford v. Washington (defining a criminal defendant's confrontation right under the Sixth Amendment) and District of Columbia v.

Heller (holding that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees an individual right to handgun ownership).

Early life and education

Scalia was born on March 11, , in Trenton, New Jersey.^[9] He was the only child of Salvatore Eugenio "Eugene" Scalia (–), an Italian immigrant from Sommatino, Sicily.

Salvatore graduated from Rutgers University and was a graduate student at Columbia University and clerk at the time of his son's birth.^[10] The elder Scalia would become a professor of Romance languages at Brooklyn College, where he was an adherent to the formalistNew Criticism school of literary theory.^[11] Scalia's mother, Catherine Louise (née&#;Panaro; –), was born in Trenton to Italian immigrant parents and worked as an elementary school teacher.^[10][12]

In , Scalia and his family moved to Elmhurst, Queens, where he attended P.S.&#;13 Clement&#;C.

Moore School.^[14] After completing eighth grade, he obtained an academic scholarship to Xavier High School, a Jesuit military school in Manhattan, from which he graduated ranked first in his class in ^[17] Scalia achieved a average at Xavier, earning decorations in Latin, Greek, and debate, among other subjects, in addition to being a distinguished member of its Glee club.^[18] He later reflected that he spent much of his time on schoolwork and admitted, "I was never cool."^[19]

While a youth, Scalia was also active as a Boy Scout and was part of the Scouts' national honor society, the Order of the Arrow.^[20] Classmate and future New York State official William Stern remembered Scalia in his high school days: "This kid was a conservative when he was 17&#;years old.

Antonin scalia wife: Archived from the original on February 2, Retrieved January 29, Please don't go away! March 8,

An archconservative Catholic. He could have been a member of the Curia. He was the top student in the class. He was brilliant, way above everybody else."^[9]

In , Scalia enrolled at Georgetown University, where he majored in history. He became a champion collegiate debater in Georgetown's Philodemic Society and a critically praised thespian.

He took his junior year abroad in Switzerland at the University of Fribourg.^[9] Scalia graduated from Georgetown in as class valedictorian with a Bachelor of Arts, summa cum laude. Scalia then went to Harvard Law School, where he was a notes editor for the Harvard Law Review.^[24] He graduated in with a Bachelor of Laws, magna cum laude, among the top of the class.

During his time at Harvard, Scalia was awarded a Sheldon Fellowship, which allowed him to travel abroad in Europe during and ^[25]

Early legal career (–)

Scalia began his legal career at the law firm Jones, Day, Cockley and Reavis (now Jones Day) in Cleveland, Ohio, where he worked from to ^[24] He was highly regarded at the law firm and would most likely have been made a partner but later said he had long intended to teach.

He left Jones Day in to become a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, moving his family to Charlottesville.^[26]

After four years in Charlottesville, Scalia entered public service in President Richard Nixon appointed him general counsel for the Office of Telecommunications Policy, where one of his principal assignments was to formulate federal policy for the growth of cable television.

From to , he was chairman of the Administrative Conference of the United States, a small independent agency that sought to improve the functioning of the federal bureaucracy.^[25] In mid, Nixon nominated him as Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel.^[25] After Nixon's resignation, the nomination was continued by President Gerald Ford, and Scalia was confirmed by the Senate on August 22,

In the aftermath of Watergate, the Ford administration was engaged in a number of conflicts with Congress.

Scalia repeatedly testified before congressional committees, defending Ford administration assertions of executive privilege regarding its refusal to turn over documents. Within the administration, Scalia advocated a presidential veto for a bill to amend the Freedom of Information Act, which would greatly increase the act's scope.

Scalia's view prevailed, and Ford vetoed the bill, but Congress overrode it. In early , Scalia argued his only case before the Supreme Court, Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc. v. Republic of Cuba. Scalia, on behalf of the U.S. government, argued in support of Dunhill, and that position was successful. Following Ford's defeat by President Jimmy Carter, Scalia worked for several months at the American Enterprise Institute.

He then returned to academia, taking up residence at the University of Chicago Law School from to ,^[32] though he spent one year as a visiting professor at Stanford Law School.

Justice Antonin Scalia: Genealogy, Family Tree and Death ...

Family tree of Antonin SCALIA - Geneastar

Dr. Salvatore Eugene Scalia (1903 - 1986) - Genealogy - Geni.com

Toggle share options

During Scalia's time at Chicago, Peter H. Russell hired him on behalf of the Canadian government to write a report on how the United States was able to limit the activities of its secret services for the McDonald Commission, which was investigating abuses by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. The report—finished in —encouraged the commission to recommend that a balance be struck between civil liberties and the essentially unchecked activities of the RCMP.^[34] In , he became the first faculty adviser for the University of Chicago's chapter of the newly founded Federalist Society.^[32]

U.S.

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (–)

When Ronald Reagan was elected president in November , Scalia hoped for a major position in the new administration. He was interviewed for the position of solicitor general of the United States, but the position went to Rex E. Lee, to Scalia's great disappointment. Scalia was offered a judgeship on the Chicago-based U.S.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in early but declined it, hoping to be appointed to the more influential U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Later that year, Reagan offered Scalia a seat on the D.C. Circuit, which he accepted. He was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on August 5, , and was sworn in on August 17,

On the D.C.

Circuit, Scalia built a conservative record while winning applause in legal circles for powerful, witty legal writing which was often critical of the Supreme Court precedents he felt bound as a lower-court judge to follow. Scalia's opinions drew the attention of Reagan administration officials, who, according to The New York Times, "liked virtually everything they saw and&#; listed him as a leading Supreme Court prospect".^[37]

Nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States ()

In , Chief Justice Warren Burger informed the White House of his intent to retire.

Reagan first decided to nominate Associate Justice William Rehnquist to become Chief Justice. That choice meant that Reagan would also have to choose a nominee to fill Rehnquist's seat as associate justice.^[38] Attorney General Edwin Meese, who advised Reagan on the choice, seriously considered only Scalia and Robert Bork, a fellow judge on the DC Circuit.

Feeling that this might well be Reagan's last opportunity to pick a Supreme Court justice, the president and his advisers chose Scalia over Bork. Many factors influenced the decision.

Antonin scalia family tree Archived from the original on June 30, Law and Philosophy. Retrieved June 24, He described The Washington Post as " shrilly liberal".

Reagan wanted to appoint the first Italian-American justice.^[40] In addition, Scalia was nine years younger and would likely serve longer on the Court.^[38] Scalia also had the advantage of not having Bork's "paper trail"; the elder judge had written controversial articles about individual rights.^[42] Scalia was called to the White House and accepted Reagan's nomination.^[38]

When Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Scalia's nomination opened in August , he faced a committee that had just argued divisively over the Rehnquist nomination.

Witnesses and Democratic senators contended that before becoming a judge, Rehnquist had engaged in activities designed to discourage minorities from voting. Committee members had little taste for a second battle over Scalia and were in any event reluctant to oppose the first Italian-American Supreme Court nominee. The judge was not pressed heavily on controversial issues such as abortion or civil rights.^[45] Scalia, who attended the hearing with his wife and nine children seated behind him, found time for a humorous exchange with Sen.

Howard Metzenbaum (D-OH), whom he had defeated in a tennis match in, as the nominee put it, "a case of my integrity overcoming my judgment".

Scalia met no opposition from the committee. The Senate debated Scalia's nomination only briefly, confirming him 98–0 on September 17, thereby making him the Court's first Italian-American Justice.

That vote followed Rehnquist's confirmation as Chief Justice by a vote of 65–33 on the same day. Scalia took his seat on September 26, One committee member, Senator and future President Joe Biden (D-DE), later stated that he regretted not having opposed Scalia "because he was so effective".

Supreme Court

Governmental structure and powers

Separation of powers

It was Scalia's view that clear lines of separation among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches follow directly from the Constitution, with no branch allowed to exercise powers granted to another branch.

In his early days on the Court, he authored a powerful—and solitary—dissent in Morrison v. Olson (), in which the Court's majority upheld the Independent Counsel law. Scalia's thirty-page draft dissent surprised Justice Harry Blackmun for its emotional content; Blackmun felt "it could be cut down to ten pages if Scalia omitted the screaming".^[49] Scalia indicated that the law was an unwarranted encroachment on the executive branch by the legislative.

He warned, "Frequently an issue of this sort will come before the Court clad, so to speak, in sheep's clothing&#; But this wolf comes as a wolf".^[49]

The case of Mistretta v. United States challenged the United States Sentencing Commission, an independent body within the judicial branch whose members (some of whom were federal judges) were removable only for good cause.

The petitioner argued that the arrangement violated the separation of powers and that the United States Sentencing Guidelines promulgated by the commission were invalid. Eight justices joined in the majority opinion written by Blackmun, upholding the Guidelines as constitutional. Scalia dissented, stating that the issuance of the Guidelines was a lawmaking function that Congress could not delegate and dubbed the Commission "a sort of junior-varsity Congress".^[49]

In , Congress passed the Line Item Veto Act, which allowed the president to cancel items from an appropriations bill (a bill authorizing spending) once passed into law.

Antonin scalia family life Merritt Jr. Vinson — , cases Earl Warren — , cases Warren E. After the assignment, the justices generally communicate about a case by sending notes and draft opinions to each other's chambers. By Stephanie Dube Dwilson.

The statute was challenged the following year. The matter rapidly reached the Supreme Court, which struck down the law as violating the Presentment Clause of the Constitution, which governs what the president is permitted to do with a bill once it has passed both houses of Congress. Scalia dissented, seeing no Presentment Clause difficulties and feeling that the act did not violate the separation of powers.

He argued that authorizing the president to cancel an appropriation was no different from allowing him to spend an appropriation at his discretion, which had long been accepted as constitutional.

Detainee cases

In , in Rasul v. Bush, the Court held that federal courts had jurisdiction to hear habeas corpus petitions brought by detainees at the Guantanamo Bay detainment camp.

Scalia accused the majority of "spring[ing] a trap on the Executive" by ruling that it could hear cases involving persons at Guantanamo when no federal court had ever ruled that it had the authority to hear cases involving people there.

Scalia, joined by Justice John Paul Stevens, also dissented in the case of Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, involving Yaser Hamdi, an American citizen detained in the United States on the allegation he was an enemy combatant.

The Court held that although Congress had authorized Hamdi's detention, Fifth Amendment due process guarantees giving a citizen such as Hamdi held in the United States as an enemy combatant the right to contest that detention before a neutral decision maker. Scalia opined that the AUMF (Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists) could not be read to suspend habeas corpus and that the Court, faced with legislation by Congress that did not grant the president power to detain Hamdi, was trying to "Make Everything Come Out Right".

In March , Scalia gave a talk at the University of Fribourg in Switzerland.

When asked about detainee rights, he responded: "Give me a break&#; I had a son on that battlefield and they were shooting at my son, and I'm not about to give this man who was captured in a war a full jury trial. I mean it's crazy".^[56] Although Scalia was not referring to any particular individual, the Supreme Court was about to consider the case of Salim Ahmed Hamdan, supposed driver to Osama bin Laden, who was challenging the military commissions at Guantanamo Bay.^[56] A group of retired military officers that supported Hamdan's position asked Scalia to recuse himself, or step aside from hearing the case, which he declined to do.^[57] The Court held 5–3 in Hamdan v.

Rumsfeld that the federal courts had jurisdiction to consider Hamdan's claims; Scalia, in dissent, contended that any Court authority to consider Hamdan's petition had been eliminated by the jurisdiction-strippingDetainee Treatment Act of ^[58]

Federalism

In federalism cases pitting the powers of the federal government against those of the states, Scalia often took the states' positions.

In , the Supreme Court considered the case of Printz v.

Antonin scalias children He castigated the majority for including in their count states that had abolished the death penalty entirely, stating that doing so was "rather like including old-order Amishmen in a consumer-preference poll on the electric car. Independent Journal. In the case of Apprendi v. Succeeded by Robert Anthony.

United States, a challenge to certain provisions of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, which required chief law enforcement officers of localities in states to perform certain duties. In Printz, Scalia wrote the Court's majority decision. The Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the provision that imposed those duties as violating the Tenth Amendment, which reserves to the states and to the people those powers not granted to the federal government.

In , Scalia concurred in Gonzales v. Raich, which read the Commerce Clause to hold that Congress could ban the use of marijuana even when states approve its use for medicinal purposes. Scalia opined that the Commerce Clause, together with the Necessary and Proper Clause, permitted the regulation. In addition, Scalia felt that Congress may regulate intrastate activities if doing so is a necessary part of a more general regulation of interstate commerce.^[60] He based that decision on Wickard v.

Filburn, which he now wrote "expanded the Commerce Clause beyond all reason".^[61]

Scalia rejected the existence of the negative Commerce Clause doctrine,^[62][63] calling it "a judicial fraud".^[64]

Scalia took a broad view of the Eleventh Amendment, which bars certain lawsuits against states in the federal courts.

In his dissent in Pennsylvania v. Union Gas Co., Scalia stated that there was no intent on the part of the framers to have the states surrender any sovereign immunity and that the case that provoked the Eleventh Amendment, Chisholm v. Georgia, came as a surprise to them. Professor Ralph Rossum, who wrote a survey of Scalia's constitutional views, suggests that the justice's view of the Eleventh Amendment was actually contradictory to the language of the Amendment.

Individual rights

Abortion

Scalia argued that there is no constitutional right to abortion and that if the people desire legalized abortion, a law should be passed to accomplish it.^[19] In his dissenting opinion in the case of Planned Parenthood v.

Casey, Scalia wrote:

The States may, if they wish, permit abortion on demand, but the Constitution does not require them to do so. The permissibility of abortion, and the limitations upon it, are to be resolved like most important questions in our democracy: by citizens trying to persuade one another and then voting.^[66]

Scalia repeatedly called upon his colleagues to strike down Roe v. Wade. Scalia hoped to find five votes to strike down Roe in the case of Webster v. Reproductive Health Services but was not successful in doing so. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor cast the deciding vote, allowing the abortion regulations at issue in the case to stand but not overruling Roe.

Scalia concurred only in part, writing, "Justice O'Connor's assertion, that a 'fundamental rule of judicial restraint' requires us to avoid reconsidering Roe cannot be taken seriously". He noted, "We can now look forward to at least another Term of carts full of mail from the public, and the streets full of demonstrators".

The Court returned to the issue of abortion in the case of Stenberg v.

Carhart, in which it invalidated a Nebraska statute outlawing partial-birth abortion. Justice Stephen Breyer wrote for the Court that the law was unconstitutional because it did not allow an exception for the health of the woman. Scalia dissented, comparing the Stenberg case to two of the most reviled cases in Supreme Court history: "I am optimistic enough to believe that, one day, Stenberg v.

Carhart will be assigned its rightful place in the history of this Court's jurisprudence beside Korematsu and Dred Scott. The method of killing a human child&#; proscribed by this statute is so horrible that the most clinical description of it evokes a shudder of revulsion".

In , the Court upheld a federal statute banning partial-birth abortion in Gonzales v.

Carhart. University of Chicago law professor Geoffrey R. Stone, a former colleague of Scalia's, criticized Gonzales, stating that religion had influenced the outcome because all five justices in the majority were Catholic, whereas the dissenters were Protestant or Jewish.^[72] This angered Scalia to such an extent that he stated he would not speak at the University of Chicago as long as Stone was there.

Race, gender, and sexual orientation

Scalia generally voted to strike down laws that make distinctions by race, gender, or sexual orientation.

In , he concurred with the Court's judgment in City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co., in which the Court applied strict scrutiny to a city program requiring a certain percentage of contracts to go to minorities, and struck down the program. Scalia did not join the majority opinion, however. He disagreed with O'Connor's opinion for the Court, holding that states and localities could institute race-based programs if they identified past discrimination and if the programs were designed to remedy the past racism.

Five years later, in Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña, he concurred in the Court's judgment and in part with the opinion that extended strict scrutiny to federal programs. Scalia noted in that matter his view that government can never have a compelling interest in making up for past discrimination by racial preferences:

To pursue the concept of racial entitlement—even for the most admirable and benign of purposes—is to reinforce and preserve for future mischief the way of thinking that produced race slavery, race privilege and race hatred.

In the eyes of government, we are just one race here. It is American.

In the case of Grutter v. Bollinger, involving racial preferences in the University of Michigan's law school, Scalia mocked the Court majority's finding that the school was entitled to continue using race as a factor in admissions to promote diversity and to increase "cross-racial understanding".

Scalia noted: