Inside Antonin Scalia's FBI File
The 483 pages posted this month on the FBI's online vault reveal FBI interviews with colleagues, friends and neighbors. Scalia's voice appears fleetingly in the file.
January 08, 2020 at 02:44 PM
7 minute read
Nearly four years after the death of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, the FBI recently released its files on Scalia, offering a peek inside the confirmation process for his circuit court and Supreme Court nominations.
The 483 pages of documents posted this month on the FBI's online vault also reveal communications about a possible ethics investigation in 1993 and a purported death threat in 2006 from someone who called Scalia an "anti-Christ."
It is routine for the FBI files of prominent figures to be released publicly—though filled with redactions—after their death, in response to Freedom of Information Act requests.
Scalia's file features observations from government officials, colleagues, law professors and neighbors, all of whom were interviewed by the FBI as part of the background check process. Names of individuals, however, are shielded from public view. There are also many newspaper clippings discussing Scalia's nomination to the high court. He was confirmed 98-0 in 1986.
Scalia's voice appears fleetingly in the FBI file, released on Jan. 3. He was asked at one point, in a written submission, about whether he had ever been a party in any civil court action. He responded: "In about 1976 (I am very uncertain of the date) I filed an action in small claims court in the District of Columbia to recover for damages done to my car by a parking garage. I prevailed."
What follows are some of the notable nuggets culled from the FBI's Scalia file:
>> Scalia the writer: The FBI in April 1982 contacted the U.S. solicitor general's office about Scalia's consideration for the D.C. Circuit. The unidentified reference described Scalia as "one of the top twelve lawyers in the nation." And on his writing: Scalia "writes with clarity and fine style, which is readable, persuasive and entertaining." Scalia, of course, was widely regarded as one of the strongest writers on the Supreme Court. "Justice Scalia's opinions mesmerize law students. And why should they not? The captivating style, full of wit, dash, and verve," Justice Elena Kagan said in 2016, after Scalia's death. She added: "As a sheer writer, I think, Justice Scalia belongs in the company of Justices Holmes, Brandeis, and Jackson."
>> Ethics investigation: The FBI considered—but did not actually undertake—an ethics investigation in 1992 at the behest of an unnamed person who was concerned that Scalia participated in a Supreme Court case in which one of the parties had recently paid him an honorarium. The complainant cited a USA Today report (co-authored by Tony Mauro) that in the 1988 case of Shapero v. Kentucky Bar Association, Scalia did not state in his financial disclosure form that the bar association had paid $2,500 for a speech he gave, though the University of Kentucky law school wrote the check. The FBI found that the bar association, in fact, had paid for half of the honorarium and considered launching an Ethics in Government Act investigation. For reasons that were redacted, the case was "administratively closed."
>> Scalia, a media critic: In the 1986 vetting of Scalia for his nomination as a Supreme Court justice, almost all of the FBI interviews of people who knew him were glowingly positive. His temperament and legal acumen were widely praised. One person who was interviewed, however, had somewhat mixed views. The University of North Carolina School of Law professor told the agent that Scalia had "a reputation for fairness although he is strong-willed and holds strong beliefs." The professor also stated that Scalia "has a reputation in judicial circles of being against the media, no friend of the First Amendment and … questions the media's right to question public officials." The professor's name was redacted, but other clues in the interview report make it clear that it was Eugene Gressman, a renowned constitutional scholar who died in 2010. One of the newspaper clippings in the file was a 1986 New York Times op-ed written by R. Emmet Tyrrell, then editor of The American Spectator. Tyrrell urged the would-be justice not to take any steps to make it easier to sue for libel. "To do so would be a grave mistake," Tyrrell wrote.
>> Scalia and the Federalist Society: Scalia's FBI file included a 1986 Washington Times piece titled "The society that has liberals talking scared." The piece name-drops then-current and former members, including Scalia, who had served as the group's first faculty adviser for the University of Chicago chapter. The piece teed up a debate that has gripped legal circles in Washington ever since: the broad influence of the Federalist Society. The piece noted: "Detractors say the Federalist Society is a menace. If it succeeds as a networking operation—there is evidence it already has—it could produce a tight web of powerful lawyers and judges bent on the disruption, if not the undoing, of more than 30 years of activist U.S. jurisprudence."
>> A threat investigation: In 2006, the FBI received a report that an unnamed individual had posted on an AOL message board a threat to physically harm Scalia. The posted stated, in all-capitals, "Scalia is the Fucking Anti-Christ." The author of the posting was traced to North Carolina. The unnamed person told an agent that "the message was satire, and that he had no intention of harming Justice Scalia." The agent admonished the person not to post a similar threat again, or "it could be considered threatening and could possibly lead to federal criminal charges filed against him." The case was closed.
>> "Scalia trivia": In 1986, shortly after Reagan announced Scalia's nomination to the Supreme Court, "the search for Scalia trivia has turned into something of a Washington parlor game," a New York Times blurb, included in the FBI file, stated. Did you know, the item said, that one of Scalia's nine children was, at the time, a 22-year-old writer and researcher at the U.S. Labor Department? That son, Eugene Scalia, now runs the place.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump-Appointed Judge Presides Over NASCAR Antitrust Dispute Under Case Reassignment
3 minute readFTC, DOJ Withdrawal of Antitrust Guidelines for Collaboration Infuriates Republicans
5 minute readCan Law Firms Avoid Landing on 'Enemy' List During the Trump Administration?
5 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Luigi Mangione's Attorney Gives a Master Class in How Not to Handle a High-Profile Case in the Media
- 2Trump, ABC News Settlement in Defamation Lawsuit Includes $1M in Attorney Fees For President-Elect
- 3Trump, ABC News Settle Defamation Lawsuit Before Depositions
- 4Call for Nominations: The Recorder and Law.com's California Legal Awards 2025
- 5The Week in Data Dec. 13: A Look at Legal Industry Trends by the Numbers
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250