Changes

== Opinions ==

== Opinions ==

Justice Scalia is easily the most outspoken member of the Court, and has been for two decades.  He once quipped to the media, "Ah yes, esteemed jurist by day, man about town by night."<ref>http://www.oyez.org/justices/antonin_scalia/</ref>  Sometimes Scalia's public commentary causes problems for himself, as when ''pro se'' litigant Dr. Michael Newdow successfully filed a motion forcing Justice Scalia's recusal of himself from Newdow's challenge to the Pledge of Allegiance.<ref>supreme.lp.findlaw.com/supreme_court/briefs/02-1624/03-7.recuse.pdf </ref>

Justice Scalia is easily the most outspoken member of the Court, and has been for two decades.  He once quipped to the media, "Ah yes, esteemed jurist by day, man about town by night."<ref>http://www.oyez.org/justices/antonin_scalia/</ref>  Sometimes Scalia's public commentary causes problems for himself, as when ''pro se'' litigant Dr. Michael Newdow successfully filed a motion that led to Justice Scalia recusing himself from Newdow's challenge to the Pledge of Allegiance to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest.<ref>supreme.lp.findlaw.com/supreme_court/briefs/02-1624/03-7.recuse.pdf </ref>

Justice Scalia is best known for his dissents, when his colorful and forceful style highlights weaknesses in his colleagues decisions.  He lambasts the notion of an "evolving" Constitution, which other justices have used to justify decisions not grounded in the text of the Constitution (see [[Responsive interpretation]] for discussion of different legal theories).  For example, when the Court held that the Constitution prohibits imposing the death penalty for any crime committed by someone under 18 years of age, Scalia was scathing in dissent:<ref>''Roper v. Simmons'', 543 U.S. 551, 607-08 (2005) (Scalia, J., dissenting) (citations omitted. emphasis added)</ref>

Justice Scalia is best known for his dissents, when his colorful and forceful style highlights weaknesses in his colleagues decisions.  He lambasts the notion of an "evolving" Constitution, which other justices have used to justify decisions not grounded in the text of the Constitution (see [[Responsive interpretation]] for discussion of different legal theories).  For example, when the Court held that the Constitution prohibits imposing the death penalty for any crime committed by someone under 18 years of age, Scalia was scathing in dissent:<ref>''Roper v. Simmons'', 543 U.S. 551, 607-08 (2005) (Scalia, J., dissenting) (citations omitted. emphasis added)</ref>