Rules Versus Standards in Constitutional and Statutory Interpretation [Showcase Panel II]

Justice Scalia believed that the rule of law required a law of rules rather than of balancing tests. He favored rules (like the requirement the President be at least 35 years old) over standards (a requirement that the president be “a mature individual") because they lend themselves more to principled judicial enforcement. As a result, Justice Scalia revolutionized the caselaw he inherited from the Burger Court by eliminating as many balancing tests as possible and replacing them with rules. An example is his favoring of a rule of viewpoint neutrality in freedom of expression cases over separate treatment of various categories of speech. He believed that rules over standards promote the rule of law because they guarantee that judges will decide like cases alike rather than deciding each case on its facts using a totality of the circumstances test. Justice Scalia was so committed to rules over standards that he refused to enforce the non-delegation doctrine because to do so he would have had to employ a balancing test standard, however, in his last year on the bench, there were signs that Justice Scalia was moving away from this position. Justice Scalia also favored rules over standards because they limit lower federal and state court discretion in applying Supreme Court precedents as compared to balancing tests. The reemergence of rules over standards in Supreme Court opinions is another of Justice Scalia's legacies. This panel was held on November 18, 2016, during the 2016 National Lawyers Convention in Washington, DC. Showcase Panel II: Rules Versus Standards in Constitutional and Statutory Interpretation --Prof. Akhil Reed Amar, Sterling Professor of Law and Political Science, Yale University --Hon. Frank Easterbrook, U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit --Prof. John C. Harrison, James Madison Distinguished Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law --Prof. Victoria Nourse, Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center --Moderator: Hon. William Francis Kuntz II, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York

U.S. Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia & Stephen Breyer Conversation on the Constitution (2009)
▶︎

U.S. Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia & Stephen Breyer Conversation on the Constitution (2009)

Is There Truth in Interpretation? Law, Literature and History
▶︎

Is There Truth in Interpretation? Law, Literature and History

Transforming Statutory Interpretation [Showcase Panel III]
▶︎

Transforming Statutory Interpretation [Showcase Panel III]

Administrative Agencies and the Separation of Powers [Showcase IV]
▶︎

Administrative Agencies and the Separation of Powers [Showcase IV]

Irving Younger's 10 Commandments Of Cross Examination at UC Hastings College Of The Law
▶︎

Irving Younger's 10 Commandments Of Cross Examination at UC Hastings College Of The Law

Akhil Reed Amar - “The Law of Our Land:  America’s Written and Unwritten Constitution”
▶︎

Akhil Reed Amar - “The Law of Our Land: America’s Written and Unwritten Constitution”

Justice Ginsburg and Baroness Hale: The British and United S
▶︎

Justice Ginsburg and Baroness Hale: The British and United S

Interpreting the Constitution: A Debate on Originalism and Its Alternatives
▶︎

Interpreting the Constitution: A Debate on Originalism and Its Alternatives

Justice Thomas Breaks Silence on Controversial Supreme Court Decisions
▶︎

Justice Thomas Breaks Silence on Controversial Supreme Court Decisions

William P. Barr | The Constitution and the Rule of Law
▶︎

William P. Barr | The Constitution and the Rule of Law

The Great Dissent: Justice Scalia's Opinion in Morrison v. Olson
▶︎

The Great Dissent: Justice Scalia's Opinion in Morrison v. Olson

ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER: A Conversation with Robert Bork
▶︎

ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER: A Conversation with Robert Bork

The 2018 Stein Lecture: John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice of the United States
▶︎

The 2018 Stein Lecture: John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice of the United States

A constitutional convention: How well would it work? — with Antonin Scalia (1979) | ARCHIVES
▶︎

A constitutional convention: How well would it work? — with Antonin Scalia (1979) | ARCHIVES

A Conversation with the Justice Clarence Thomas
▶︎

A Conversation with the Justice Clarence Thomas

Panel III: Originalism, Constitutional Interpretation, and Stare Decisis
▶︎

Panel III: Originalism, Constitutional Interpretation, and Stare Decisis

Conversation with Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia
▶︎

Conversation with Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia

Justices Breyer and Scalia Converse on the Constitution
▶︎

Justices Breyer and Scalia Converse on the Constitution

Richard Epstein | The Continuing Relevance of Hayek's The Constitution of Liberty
▶︎

Richard Epstein | The Continuing Relevance of Hayek's The Constitution of Liberty

Justice Clarence Thomas: Personal reflections on the Court, his jurisprudence, and his education.
▶︎

Justice Clarence Thomas: Personal reflections on the Court, his jurisprudence, and his education.