Description
Book SynopsisAn analysis of the discrepancy between the ways Antonin Scalia argued the Constitution should be interpreted versus how he actually interpreted the law. This volume examines Scalia's discussions of textualism in his speeches, extrajudicial writings, and judicial opinions. Throughout his writings, Scalia argues textualism is the only acceptable form of constitutional interpretation.
Trade ReviewNo scholar before Langford has systematically analyzed every one of Scalia's opinions in the three constitutional territories explored in
Scalia v. Scalia - Eighth Amendment ‘Cruel and Unusual' doctrine, First Amendment ‘Establishment' and ‘Free Exercise' doctrine, and abortion doctrine. Langford's new contribution should interest legal academics and rhetorical scholars alike."" - Colin Starger, associate professor of law at the University of Baltimore
