LETTERS: Antonin Scalia - Supreme Court's controversial conservative

ISSUE | ANTONIN SCALIA

His death is a loss for us all

I feel a great sense of loss. The death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is a great tragedy for his family, the conservative movement, and, most importantly, America ("Scalia dead at 79," Sunday).

He was one of the greatest legal minds of the last century. He was a beacon of light in a world that is becoming increasingly dark and confused, and feeling the pains of social disintegration.

|Arthur Horn, East Windsor

An American - period

The media describe Justice Antonin Scalia as the first Italian American to serve on the court. I never thought of him that way. I only thought of him as an American, and the sooner we all think of ourselves that way, the better off we will all be.

That is part of Scalia's legacy along with his originalist interpretation of the Constitution.

|Ben LaGarde, Glenmoore, blagarde2@gmail.com

Religious beliefs shaped law

Justice Antonin Scalia was noted more for his blistering comments in dissent rather than the promulgation of his assent. He was fearful of the "so-called homosexual agenda." Where does it say in our Constitution that justices are the arbiters of which behaviors are acceptable?

The 14th Amendment guarantees us all equal protection. However, like many justices on the bench, Scalia was using his religious tenets to shape the law. As a devout Catholic, he routinely and openly injected his belief system as footnotes on what the framers were thinking. He not only disgraced the court but shredded the Constitution rather than uphold it.

|Larry A. Wernick, Fort Washington, lawernick@gmail.com

GOP delay

a mistake

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was quick to announce that the Senate would not consider an appointment by President Obama to replace Antonin Scalia and that the next president - a Republican, he hopes - should have that privilege.

The irony is that Scalia was a firm believer in originalism, or a strict, literal reading of the Constitution, which states in unequivocal terms that the president - not the next president - shall have the duty to nominate the members of the court.

McConnell's stance may come back to bite Obama's opponents when the decisions about to be announced are tied 4-4, retaining the decisions of the appeals courts, most of which are liberal.

|Marlene Lieber, Medford

Toomey should work to fill seat

Sen. Pat Toomey (R., Pa.) must stand up to

Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) and others who call for the Senate to obstruct rather than fulfill its constitutional role in appointments.

Toomey has said, "We are a nation of laws," and citizens must respect that system. Now is the time for him to respect the Constitution by working with all willing members of the Senate to provide advice and consent to President Obama as he decides on his nominee to the Supreme Court.

|Brian Shaud, Swarthmore

Remove politics from the process

The original purpose of the third branch of government was, and should be, to impartially safeguard the Constitution. The way judges are appointed undermines this, and the Republican response to Justice Antonin Scalia's death shows it's time for an amendment to change the process.

How about something like a bipartisan panel of six or eight senators, with each party equally represented, choosing a waiting list of three judges while the court is full? The court would be less composed of political appointments and would continue its business without interruption when a vacancy occurrs.

No court in this country should be influenced by political viewpoints, let alone the highest one in the land.

|Joseph Goldberg, Abington