Open AccessPosted Content
Originalism as Faith
Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
In this article, the role of originalism in constitutional interpretation is discussed and a recent article in the Columbia Law Review by University of Chicago Law Professor Will Baude called "Inclusive Originalism" is discussed.Abstract:
This essay discusses the role (or lack thereof) originalism plays in constitutional interpretation and critiques a recent article in the Columbia Law Review by University of Chicago Law Professor Will Baude titled "Inclusive Originalism." The thesis of the essay is that Baude's "inclusive originalism" specifically and "New Originalism" more broadly, either inaccurately describe constitutional decision-making by mislabeling non-originalist decisions as originalist, or define originalism in a way that is indistinguishable from non-originalist methods. Either way, Professor Baude and other New Originalists vastly overstate the importance of original meaning to constitutional law. I suggest at the end of this piece that they do so largely to avoid the realist critique that values, not text or history, drive Supreme Court decisions.read more
Citations
More filters
Posted Content
The Original Understanding of Original Intent
TL;DR: Powell as mentioned in this paper examined the historical validity of the claim that the framers of the Constitution expected future interpreters to seek the meaning of the document in the framer's intent.
From hobbes to habermas: the anti-cultural turn in western political thought
TL;DR: The anti-cultural turn of Western Political Thought that has emerged out of Enlightenment thinking and was first turned into a comprehensive political idea by Thomas Hobbes is discussed in this paper. But it is the emotional part of the human psyche that enables us to create family like bonds based on culture.
Posted Content
Legal Realism as Theory of Law
TL;DR: The realists' rule-skepticism was actually an attack, common among philosophical anarchists, on the ability of the law to provide citizens (and particularly judges adjudicating cases) with objective reasons for obedience as discussed by the authors.
Book ChapterDOI
The Constitutional Communication Model of Originalism
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors described originalism's current status and noted the many areas of current debate among originalists, but they did not take sides in the debates, and their description was ecumenical because it did not “take sides.
Posted Content
Originalism and the Good Constitution
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that originalism advances the welfare of the present day citizens of the United States, because it promotes constitutional interpretations that are likely to have better consequences today than those of non-originalist theories.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
The hollow hope : can courts bring about social change?
TL;DR: Rosenberg's second edition of "The Hollow Hope" as mentioned in this paper was published in 2000, and it has been widely cited as a seminal work in political and social reform research.
Book
The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited
TL;DR: In this article, two leading scholars of the US Supreme Court and its policy making, systematically present and validates the use of the attitudinal model to explain and predict Supreme Court decision making.
Book
The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model
TL;DR: A political history of the Supreme Court can be found in this paper, where the authors present a model of decision-making in the court and the decision-on-the-merits process.
Book
Freedom's Law: The Moral Reading of the American Constitution
TL;DR: The Moral Reading and the Majoritarian Premise as mentioned in this paper is a collection of essays about life, death, race, education, equality, and the right to be free from government censorship and censorship.
Book
How Judges Think
TL;DR: In this article, a distinguished and experienced appellate court judge, Richard A. Posner, offers a unique and, to orthodox legal thinkers, a startling perspective on how judges and justices decide cases, arguing that conventional legal materials enable judges to ascertain the true facts of a case and apply clear pre-existing legal rules to them, and that is the domain of legalist reasoning.