“I write to understand as much as to be understood.”
Elie Wiesel (1928–2016) writer, professor, political activist, Nobel Laureate, and Holocaust survivor
“In law school, I never understood [antitrust law]. I later found out, in reading the writings of those who now do understand it, that I should not have understood it because it did not make any sense then.”
On Antitrust law: Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings, 8/5/1986, transcript http://a255.g.akamaitech.net/7/255/2422/22sep20051120/www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/senate/judiciary/sh99-1064/31-110.pdf at p. 36). <br class="br">1980s
Help us to complete the source, original and additional information
Do you have more details about the quote "In law school, I never understood [antitrust law]. I later found out, in reading the writings of those who now do under…" by Antonin Scalia?
Antonin Scalia100
former Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United… 1936–2016Related quotes
William Ralph Inge (1860–1954) Dean of St Pauls
"Confessio Fidei" http://archive.org/stream/outspokenessays00ingeiala#page/24/mode/2up/search/I+have+never+understood+why+it+should+be+considered+derogatory+to+the+Creator+to+suppose+that+he+has+a+sense+of+humour, Outspoken Essays (Second Series) (1922)
George Savile, 1st Marquess of Halifax (1633–1695) English politician
Of Laws.
Political, Moral, and Miscellaneous Reflections (1750), Political Thoughts and Reflections
Alastair Reynolds book Diamond Dogs
Diamond Dogs, Chapter 11 (p. 135)
Short fiction, Diamond Dogs, Turquoise Days (2003)
Abraham Lincoln (1809–1865) 16th President of the United States
1830s, The Lyceum Address (1838)
Context: When I so pressingly urge a strict observance of all the laws, let me not be understood as saying there are no bad laws, or that grievances may not arise for the redress of which no legal provisions have been made. I mean to say no such thing. But I do mean to say that although bad laws, if they exist, should be repealed as soon as possible, still, while they continue in force, for the sake of example they should be religiously observed. So also in unprovided cases. If such arise, let proper legal provisions be made for them with the least possible delay, but till then let them, if not too intolerable, be borne with.
Ronald Reagan (1911–2004) American politician, 40th president of the United States (in office from 1981 to 1989)
Interview with LA Times http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1986/62386e.htm (23 June 1986) <br class="br">1980s, Second term of office (1985–1989) <br class="br">Context: I have never given a litmus test to anyone that I have appointed to the bench.... I feel very strongly about those social issues, but I also place my confidence in the fact that the one thing that I do seek are judges that will interpret the law and not write the law. We've had too many examples in recent years of courts and judges legislating. They're not interpreting what the law says and whether someone has violated it or not. In too many instances, they have been actually legislating by legal decree what they think the law should be, and that I don't go for. And I think that the two men that we're just talking about here, Rehnquist and Scalia, are interpreters of the Constitution and the law.
Arthur James Balfour (1848–1930) British Conservative politician and statesman
Speech https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1887/mar/28/motion-for-leave-first-reading#column_1656 in the House of Commons (28 March 1887) introducing the Irish Crimes Bill <br class="br">Chief Secretary for Ireland
“But I still couldn't figure out what it all meant. The more I found out, the less I understood.”
Jonathan Safran Foer book Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
Source: Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close