Tony & The Amendments

Walker, Hunter, Reamer and I went to see Justice Scalia speak in Ann Arbor today. I just realized that I'm the only one with out an -er last name. I went with "one who hunts", "one who walks" and "one who reams". I'd rather not be the one who reams. I wonder if to ream is something different in German than what I think it means. Wait, what do I think it means? It is not clear. Anyway. I am the man of lud.

We got to Ann Arbor, walked around the law school, which is gorgeous. I am very jealous now. We then waited about 2 hours to see the justice speak. It was eventful. First, he was VERY funny. Really, he's a funny guy. And a good speaker. He talked about Originalism and the constitution. He says that he interprets the constitution as it is written. I agree with a lot of his ideas, but I still believe that the constitution is interpreted. The constitution has to grow because our society has drasitically changed over 200 years. Email is covered by the first amendment. Semi-Automatic assault rifles by the second. Neither of these were predicted by the writers or ratifiers of the constitution. What is cruel and unusual punishment is different from what it was 200 years ago. The justice argued that we should follow the constitution only for what it says, because it's a very specific document. The 9th amendment requires a trial by jury for all civil matters regarding more than $20. However, the 8th says no cruel or unusual punishment. If the constitution was so specific, then why didn't the founding fathers go into more detail. I believe the the interpretation of this amendment can only change with time.

There were protesters during the speech. They were completely silent and held signs. I thought it was disrespectful and they should do that outside. However, I wouldn't have seen them if they weren't booed and told to sit down. They left peacefully without a word. After the speech there was a question and answer session, where annoying people asked annoying questions and were shot down by Scalia. I think he was a little condecending but amusing nonetheless. He is a very smart man and could rattle of information about cases decided long long ago.

I enjoyed the speech because it was not political. It was an honest view of interpreting the consitution which I think is a valid interpretation. I disagree, but I'm also not a Justice. I haven't converted but I have much more respect for the Justice.

Afterwards we ate at Mongolian and came home. It was an excellent day.