To the Letter of the Law, As He Read It

There is no doubt that Justice Antonin Scalia, who was reported dead yesterday evening at 79, cared a great deal about words. He chose his own with dogged deliberation; he also, clearly, possessed a wide vocabulary. In a 2013 interview, he suggested that a major problem with the Internet is its being “the cause of careless writing.”

“Now the Senate is looking for ‘moderate’ judges, ‘mainstream’ judges. What in the world is a moderate interpretation of a constitutional text? Halfway between what it says and what we’d like it to say?” — Antonin Scalia

The timing of Scalia’s death could be a huge game changer for the 2016 election and for U.S. politics. Eric will have more on this, and on Scalia’s record, in Tuesday’s episode of Planet Waves FM.

True to his natal Chiron in Gemini (and angular Moon conjunct Pallas, perhaps), Scalia’s term on the Supreme Court bench was most remarkable, I would argue, for his tenacious originalism. The terms of the U.S. Constitution — as he believed its authors intended — he undoubtedly held as sacred and untouchable as the dogma of his Catholic faith.

His right-wing political stance probably influenced, at least unconsciously, his understanding of the Constitution’s fundamental meaning and applications.

That understanding led him to defend capital punishment, to support the use of torture, and to object to marriage equality. Then again, he also dissented against the Maryland v. King ruling, which allowed arresting officers to collect cheek swabs, on the basis of its infringement of civil liberties: “But I doubt that the proud men who wrote the charter of our liberties would have been so eager to open their mouths for royal inspection.”

The problems with his traditionalist stance are serious and manifold, and have been satirized neatly by John Oliver and others. It is debatable whether the Founding Fathers themselves would have encouraged such rigorous adherence to the letter of their writing; never mind whether it’s wise or fair to limit a nation’s progress to the views of men so long dead, however enlightened they were.

Scalia’s natal chart attests both to an almost visceral resistance to change (the rising Moon is closely opposite Uranus) and the deliberate detachment with which he practiced (Mercury and Venus conjunct in Aquarius). The 5th house Sun and Libra rising may be a key to his personal charm, with Saturn conjunct the Sun illustrating his dry and often scathing sense of humor (especially paired with the Scorpio Moon).

Whatever we might feel about Scalia, it’s evident he was sincere in his work, and never reticent in expressing his opinions. It’s also clear (as Judith Gayle has already pointed out) that his death paves the way for real change in the legislative branch. Let us hope his successor has a somewhat more progressive vision.