- Thursday, April 7, 2016

Naming rights are usually big business. Corporations pay millions of dollars for the right to put their names on stadiums, arenas, and almost anything made of brick and mortar. It’s all about marketing. Apart from the stadium or arena, universities have usually been more circumspect, preferring to name buildings and schools for benefactors or distinguished public figures. When George Mason University announced that it would name its law school in honor of the late Justice Antonin Scalia, there was wide approval by both thoughtful liberals and pleased conservatives. It would be a fitting commemoration of 30 years of faithful service on the U.S. Supreme Court.

His devotion to the Constitution, the law and in particular to the legal concept of “original intent,” the doctrine that the Constitution says what it means and means what it says, redeemed “original intent” from obscurity and put it firmly again in the legal mainstream.

The hard left, mean-spirited and uncharitable, howled. Justice Scalia, they say, was a bad actor unworthy of honor, and his name should not be put on a law school regarded as one of the best in the nation. Naming the school after Justice Scalia was endorsed by mainstream liberals, however, including Gov. Terry McAuliffe of Virginia, a fiercely partisan Democrat, and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, one of the most dedicated liberals on the High Court. They recognized Justice Scalia’s scholarship and devoted service to the nation over four decades in the judiciary.

Nevertheless, 11 Democrats of the Virginia legislature this week asked the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia, which will make the final decision, to keep Justice Scalia’s name off the law school. One of the 11 Democrats decried his decisions and dissents as “polarizing” and “controversial,” which of course is correct. The decisions of all judges are “polarizing” and “controversial.” The losing party to a law suit always feels a little polarized, and creating “controversy” is the work of every judge.

The dissenters to naming the law school for the justice imagine that to reject Antonin Scalia is to repudiate his judicial philosophy, but the power of Mr. Scalia’s reasoning and language in defense of the Constitution, as it was written and adopted, will influence the interpretation of the law for decades to come. “Polarization,” such as it may be, over naming the George Mason law school is manufactured by those of petty and stingy minds. They’re uncomfortable dealing with anyone who holds beliefs and opinions different from their own. Honoring public men requires give and take, particularly as partisan wrangling over issues grows ever more contentious.

When Democrats in Maryland proposed honoring the late Justice Thurgood Marshall by adding his name to Baltimore-Washington International Airport, Republicans agreed it was a good idea. Justice Marshall’s importance as a legal and historic figure in the nation’s affairs is inarguable, polarizing and controversial though some of his decisions and dissents were. Some Democrats still complain about the name on the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, occasionally suggesting that his name be erased, rendering him as what the Soviets called “a nonperson.”

A good name, so the Book of Proverbs tells us, “is rather to be chosen than great riches, and loving favor rather than silver and gold.” Naming a law school for Antonin Scalia, who earned his good name, honors not only a faithful servant of the law but the Constitution, scholarship and learning. Justice Scalia’s name would honor the law school as well.

Copyright © 2024 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide