chjohnson at MAIL.LAW.UTEXAS.EDU
Fri Aug 18 16:11:44 PDT 2000
Words are never enough: you have to know the intent or purpose. After
all "[w]hen the Almighty himself condescends to address mankind in their
own language, his meaning, luminous as it must be, is rendered dim and
doubtful by the cloudy medium through which it is communicated."
Federalist 37 (Madison), January 11, 1788. Again, the claim that "intent"
can be driven out of interpretation in the name of "objective meaning"
Since it is does not work on its own merits, I suspect that the fear is
that expressions of intent have some embarassing programs implied, which
must be defeated. The intent of the Constitution is indeed
extraordinarily nationalistic; it is an angry anti-state document written
to rein in the immoral and irresponsible states of 1787. Is that what the
fight is about?
Calvin H. Johnson
Andrews & Kurth Centennial Professor of Law
The University of Texas School of Law
727 E. 26th St.
Austin, TX 78705
(512) 232-1306 (voice)
FAX: (512) 232-2399
More information about the Conlawprof