Antonin Scalia Didn’t Let His Own Opinion Interfere With His Sense of Justice

October 09, 2017

WRITER

Even on hot-button issues, he always sided with the Constitution. On today’s show, journalist and editor Ed Whalen shared some stories about the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and talked about the new book, “Scalia Speaks,” which compiles some of the justice’s greatest speeches.

“It’s a real treasure trove of Justice Scalia’s thoughts,” Whalen said. “Not just on law, but on faith, on learning, on life.”

One example of Scalia’s emphasis of rule of law and the Constitution was his opinion on flag-burning, which he said was protected speech under the First Amendment – even though he personally hated that decision.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: I can't think of a time in American history, in the -- in my lifetime, that it's been harder to find a man who will stand up for what is right even against all odds and stand up because it is right, even if it hurts him. I've never experienced a time in my life where it is more important to zoom out and look at the big principles as opposed to zooming in and seeing the daily squabbles.

And that's what we want to do here in this segment.

STU: Yeah, there's a new book called Scalia Speaks: Reflections on Law, Faith, and Life Well-Lived. Antonin Scalia is certainly a guy that represents what you're talking about.

And the book is by -- one of the coeditors is Ed Whelan. You've probably read his stuff online with National Review. And the book just came out. And Ed joins us now.

GLENN: Hey, Ed, this is a collection of speeches. Some of them were unknown that he gave?

ED: That's right, Glenn. Actually, almost all of them had never been published anywhere before. It's a real treasure trove of Justice Scalia's thoughts, not just on law, but on faith, on learning, on life. I think everyone will find it just a delight.

GLENN: So, Ed, could you find any place -- as you were looking at his speeches and you were looking at his life, could you find any place to where you think he was deeply conflicted in the sense that he didn't want to make a decision or didn't want to do something, but because he believed in the Constitution, he did make that tough choice?

ED: Well, he made it quite clear that one example of that is on the matter of flag-burning. That, you know, he made the decisive vote back in the late '80s, holding that laws that specifically target flag-burning violate the First Amendment. He makes it quite clear, that if he had his way, you know, hippie flag burners would be tossed in jail. So that's just one example.

Lots of areas of criminal procedure are another. And then even on the hot-button issues. That are so contested. It's important to recognize that his position was that these were matters left to the democratic processes to decide one way or another. He did not, unlike folks on the left, misread the Constitution, to impose his supposed views on say abortion or marriage.

GLENN: One of the things that is going on right now is this idea that our rights come from God and not the government. And it seems bizarre at how many people believe that somehow or another, that rights don't come from God. That they do come from a man-made source.

Did you find anything where he was talking about that?

ED: Oh, absolutely. It recurs throughout his speeches. His recognition that our founding principles recognize that our rights come from God. And the Constitution sets up a structure that's designed to protect and fulfill those rights. Absolutely. That's at the very heart of his understanding of what America is.

And I would just add that on this Columbus Day, you know, what better opportunity to highlight the first Italian American justice, a justice who celebrated that one could both be Italian American and be 100 percent American. It's a beautiful speech that he gave just a month after he got on the court, where he talks about what makes an American. Says, no matter your blood, your place of birth, what makes it is embracing the principles of this country. And I'm afraid we see too many people abandoning those principles, in your example of believing that rights are whatever government confers are just one example.

STU: Yeah, Ed, it's amazing on Columbus Day today, where they have security around the Columbus statue, has now become some big controversy. Where Scalia in 2005 was able to become the grand marshal of the Columbus Day parade. Which was a really big deal to him.

ED: It was a huge deal. He just delighted in it. He had marched in the parade when he was a junior ROTC in Xavier High School in Manhattan. And as he said decades later, this is the top of the hill, to be grand marshal in your hometown. For an Italian kid from Queens, there could be no greater thrill than to march one last time as grand marshal of the Columbus Day Parade.

So he took great pride in being Italian American. But, again, he emphasized he wasn't a partial American. He and other Italian Americans could be fully American, precisely because they embraced the American creed.

GLENN: So as you look at today's landscape, do you see many people like him?

ED: He is in many respects, one of a kind. At the same time, he has a tremendous legacy in the law clerks, law students, lawyers he has influenced. So I think in the legal realm. We are very much living in a legal world that is defined around Justice Scalia. And many folks define themselves against him. But many others define themselves with him. And I think you see in Justice Gorsuch's selection and confirmation, just one of the many great legacies of Justice Scalia.

I think we see from the book that is Justice Scalia the man in full? The man -- a deep man -- a man of deep faith. A man who recognized that the ultimate test of life is to live out one's faith properly. It's a beautiful speech called The Christian Is Cretin (phonetic), meant ironically, that spells that out.

But, again, one of the key points he makes throughout the book in so many speeches is that his obligation as a faithful Catholic is to not misconstrue the Constitution and other laws, to indulge his views. His very obligation as a Catholic means that he -- that he shall not misread the Constitution. As he put it, the only commandment of his faith that really bore on his judging was, thou shall not lie. Thou shall not lie about the meaning of the Constitution or of other laws.

STU: Ed -- we're talking to Ed Whelan, he's the author of Scalia Speaks: Reflections on Law, Faith, and a Life Well-Lived.

The book itself is really, as you kind of pointed out, is his whole world. Right? It's him as an individual person. His faith, his life, and the legal stuff.

He entered into my thinking over the last week, however, as it relates to the tragedy in Las Vegas. And, you know, obviously the response to that has been largely, which ways will we further infringe our right to bear arms?

And it feels like -- I was interested to see if you had perspective on what Scalia believed, not only on something like this, where you have bump stocks, for example, to potentially be banned, but also the automatic weapons ban itself. What was his line when it came to where that right to bear arms stopped?

ED: Well, we have his opinion in DC versus Heller. And, you know, I think it's far-fetched for somebody on the other side to try to claim some other connection between this and the horrible incident last week.

I think it's more relevant to recognize that Justice Scalia drawing on the Framers saw that virtue in the citizenry was essential to the survival of this country.

And when you have -- you know, just a deep collapse in -- in morals and respect for life, you know, that's going to lead to some very bad things.

So I don't know what his -- his particular, you know, views might have been on gun policy or these bump stocks, whatever these are called. But, you know, the ruling in DC versus Heller was regarding a much narrower -- and I think, again, this fellow who committed a massacre certainly violated gun law after gun law. It would be a non sequitur to discuss that the absence of gun laws was a problem.

GLENN: Ed, how is Gorsuch going to -- how is he fitting these shoes?

ED: Well, Justice Gorsuch made it quite clear that he's dedicated to originalism. He's the first justice who is educated at law school, at a time when Scalia had influenced what law is, what constitutional interpretation is. I think that's a significant fact. I am very hopeful that Justice Scalia -- excuse me -- Justice Gorsuch will be a supremely fit successor to Justice Scalia. He's starting out very well so far, and his record on the Tenth Circuit I think speaks very highly of his abilities.

GLENN: Ed, thanks a lot, I appreciate it.

(music)

STU: Ed Whelan. The book is Scalia Speaks: Reflections of Law, Faith, and a Life Well-Lived. That's available everywhere now. And he's also with the National Review and the Ethics on Public Policy Center.

GLENN: Garbage in, garbage out. Make sure everything that you're reading, everything you're doing, you're putting in really good basic information and fuel into your mind. And this is a good place to start.

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Glenn's Show Prep