Substantive Due Process Reversal In McDonald

Substantive Due Process has long been a controversial subject for Supreme Court Justices and legal professoriates.Regarding Substantive Due Process as an "oxymoron"1,Scalia raised eyebrows by having "acquiesced" with it in McDonald v.Chicago.2 That was at odds with the Originalist method he had fervently preached.Scalia's concurrence in McDonald also helped to scuttle the attempt of the Originalists to revive the dormant Privileges or Immunities Clause constitutionally annulled in Slaughterhouse cases.3 As Originalism is widely regarded as Scalia's legacy,scholars often view Scalia's reconciliation with Substantive Due Process a deviation from his professed creed of Originalism.Yet of the Originalists,scholars such as Sandefur4 would dispute the claim that Substantive Due Process was not Originalist.In effect,Scalia's Substantive Due Process reversal,fits into his Conservative reading of rights.Originalism aside,it is important,then,to find out if Scalia's Substantive Due Process reversal in McDonald is emblematic of his admonition not to incorporate more rights into the Constitution.Equally important are what were the motivations of Scalia's backtrack on Substantive Due Process in McDonald and how they might influence Scalia's legacy of Originalism and why it was a bad strategy.Priming case study,the study design revolves around Scalia's Substantive Due Process jurisprudence in relevant cases.In particular,McDonald is primarily focused on to ferret out the motivations of Scalia's Substantive Due Process reversal.This study is set to resolve four questions.Firstly,the study takes steps to establish whether Scalia's Substantive Due Process reversal in McDonald was a one-time stunt or considered alteration in jurisprudence.Having established that issue,what motivated Scalia's reversal on Substantive Due Process becomes the second priority.For those motivations not only conceal Scalia's real attitude to Substantive Due Process,they also reveal Scalia's view of liberty and attitude towards the Incorporation Clause.This study,thus,is less focused on that obvious digression than what motivated Scalia's backtrack on Substantive Due Process.Thirdly,the study contends that the effort of Scalia's reversal in McDonald to ward off the incorporation of individual rights,especially those derived from the Fourteenth Amendment didn't pay off,as it could not forestall plaintiffs from using Substantive Due Process Clause to assert the constitutionality of liberties.Last but not least,the study weighs the influence of Scalia's Substantive Due Process reversal on Originalism and the US Supreme Court.The thesis winds up in concluding that Scalia's Substantive Due Process in McDonald will facilitate it as an approach to aggrandize one's own agenda at the cost of depreciating Originalism as a creed.