Abstract
One of the most controversial jurists of the modem Court, Justice Antonin Scalia asserts that his methodology provides the only legitimate means for interpreting the Constitution. This Article concludes that in both double jeopardy and contempt doctrine, however, Justice Scalia has repeatedly violated his methodological precepts. The Author further maintains that the likely cause for Scalia's departure from his methodology in these cases is ideological—founded in Scalia's hostility to contempt and, more broadly, to judicial power. The Article also explores how Scalia's double jeopardy and contempt jurisprudence has created confusion in the lower courts and thereby inhibited the use of contempt sanctions to enforce civil protection orders in domestic violence cases.
How to Cite
41 Ariz. L. Rev. 847 (1999)
5
Views
2
Downloads