Abstract

During his first eight terms as a member of the United States Supreme Court, Associate Justice Antonin Scalia was one of the Court's most prolific authors of concurring and dissenting opinions. Given the sizeable "conservative" majority on the Court, the frequency with which Justice Scalia wrote separately suggests that many of his views are not entirely acceptable to the other Reagan-Bush appointees. This dissertation examines those separate opinions for the purpose of discerning Justice Scalia's unique political and jurisprudential philosophy and explaining how it departs from the more conventional approach taken by his colleagues