Abstract

An enduring theme of conservative thought is mistrust towards claims of special expertise, grounded in technical knowledge and methods, as applied to policy, politics, and the organization of human affairs. Justice Scalia’s judicial opinions on education as well as in other areas reflect this stance, especially as applied to behavioral sciences and the law itself. Like science, the law is entrusted to an elite cadre of experts armed with specialized knowledge and training. Those experts purport to rely on determinate, neutral, objective principles in making decisions affecting society as a whole. Scalia is wary of this depiction of the law and its potential misuse, especially for questions of governance and social regulation. For Scalia, the exercise of legal and scientific expertise masks partisan preferences. Claims of specialized knowledge, both legal and scientific, enable a small, unrepresentative elite of government officials and judges to impose a progressive cultural and policy agenda on the nation as a whole. Too often these operate in derogation of democratically enacted rules and the traditional understandings and practices favored by ordinary people.