How did Antonin Scalia’s textualism guide his interpretation of laws passed by Congress?

Antonin Scalia’s textualism was a method of statutory interpretation that prioritized the common understanding of the words and phrases in a law at the time it was enacted, rather than the subjective intentions or goals of the legislators who drafted it.12

By focusing strictly on the text, Scalia aimed to limit the role of the judiciary and prevent judicial activism, which he defined as judges usurping the power of elected legislatures by effectively making law rather than interpreting it. He believed that when the meaning of a text was determined by its original public understanding, it minimized the influence of a judge's personal preferences and biases.2

Scalia argued that this approach was essential for maintaining the separation of powers, as it left policy decisions that fell outside clear constitutional or statutory constraints to the democratic process. While critics argued that his method did not eliminate judicial discretion, Scalia maintained that textualism was the most effective way to ensure that the law remained a fixed, predictable guide rather than a tool for judicial policy-making.2