By Ame Phitwong
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia gave a lecture last Thursday to a crowd of more than 1,500 in the University of Portland Chiles Center. His lecture, titled "The American Experiment," was the keynote speech that opened a three-day religious freedom conference held in Portland last weekend and hosted by the Garaventa Center.
Senior Emily Christiansen, who plans to attend law school after graduating from UP, went to the conference and the lecture because she felt they would be "excellent learning opportunities."
Scalia, a proud New Yorker, took his position on the Supreme Court in 1986 after he was nominated by Ronald Reagan.
His lecture explored eight Supreme Court cases involving examinations of the Constitution's two religious clauses, the 'establishment clause' and the 'free exercise' clause. These clauses are extensions of the first amendment, which reads "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
Senior Lara Grenko said the lecture addressed a weighty topic in the United States: religious freedom.
"Religious freedom is of great importance," Grenko said via e-mail. "I think with the great amount of freedom we are allowed here in the United States, it is easy to take for granted the simple act of attending or not attending a place of worship of our choice. In many places throughout the world this is not the case, and I believe it is highly important to protect this freedom."
In each of the eight cases he covered, Scalia described the case, the clause that was used to determine the verdict, and the actions he took concerning each case.
Along with his review, Scalia used anecdotes to explain to the audience how he formulated his approaches and decisions.
Christiansen thought Scalia's lecture was interesting.
"Luckily I was able to recognize most of the court cases he discussed because we had studied them in the Civil Liberties course last spring," she said.
In one story, Scalia reminisced about an occurrence in high school that he dubbed "The Shakespeare Principle." His teacher was responding to a student's criticism of a Shakespearean play.
"Mister, when you read Shakespeare, Shakespeare is not on trial - you are," Scalia recalled his teacher saying. Scalia used this anecdote to illustrate to the audience how he felt Constitution rules should be approached.
"Justice Scalia made a valid point in his lecture - it was the fact that jurists are inconsistently using 'analytical abstractions' in order to decide cases," senior Dan Curtin wrote in an e-mail. "The outcome of such analysis could lead to judicial activism, thus arbitrarily infringing a person's right to practice religion."
Curtin explained that religious freedom is important and that state and federal involvement in the realm of religious freedom should be limited to avoid endorsing any specific religion.
"As Justice Scalia pointed out, it is not the judicial branch, but the legislative branch which should be regulating laws and policies on topics such as religion," he said.
Senior Blair Thomas also found Scalia's lecture to be a worthwhile experience.
"I thought Justice Scalia's remarks were thought-provoking and really shed a light into an issue that has risen to the forefront of American domestic policy," Thomas said in an e-mail.
Senior Robert Benim thought the lecture was informative and interesting, but felt the Justice was somewhat contradicting at times.
"One of his arguments was that his approach in making decisions was different from the other justices because he made exceptions to the formulas they used," Benim said via e-mail. "However, the way he was conveying his message, it didn't seem he took into account exceptions to the exceptions. His goal is worthy, but it didn't seem as encompassing or realistic as he tried to make it."
Grenko attended the lecture and the dinner reception that followed at the Hilton Hotel.
"Justice Scalia made some informal remarks, at the conclusion of which he led a toast to the Constitution. After reading so many of his opinions, it was really great to see this more personal side of Justice Scalia," Grenko said.
Christiansen also attended the reception.
"I must say that the speech at the dinner was a lot more entertaining and informative," Christiansen said.
The weekend following the dinner was the conference in which students had the opportunity to give presentations about specific issues regarding religious freedom. Thomas presented at the conference about the religious impact on immigrant voting.
"I decided to take part in it because it was an experience that doesn't happen at UP very often," Thomas explained. "To present in a panel where Supreme Court Justice Scalia is the keynote speaker is an honor to take part in."
Regarding his presentation, "I think it was well-received," he said. "Nobody tore me down to my face."
Christiansen gave a presentation on the implications of state funding of religion on the integration of Muslim immigrants. She explained that she specifically addressed the differences that exist within the contexts of the United States and Germany.
"It is not a common occurrence for undergraduate students to be able to participate in a scholarly conference," Christiansen said. "My knowledge about religious freedom has been expanded, and secondly, I have learned how to present in a scholarly setting which will undoubtedly prove to be useful in the future."
In the end, Thomas felt he greatly benefited from the experience because he was "forced to defend" his views while "knowing full well others may disagree. It was an academic experience that I won't forget."
