originalism and moral skepticism

[Volokh, Eugene]

	I agree that many originalists pride themselves on being "with
respect to law" "moral skeptics," which is to say people who think that
judges shouldn't make their legal decisions based on their own sense of
morality.  But that's far from the same as being an *actual* moral
skeptic, in the sense of "denying that anything is morally inferior."

> -----Original Message-----
> From: conlawprof-bounces at lists.ucla.edu 
> [mailto:conlawprof-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Graber
> Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 4:09 PM
> To: conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu; lawcourts-l at usc.edu
> Cc: claeyser at slu.edu
> Subject: RE: originalism and moral skepticism
> 
> Several years ago I read an interesting manuscript by 
> Professor Eric Claeys of the Saint Louis Law School 
> asserting, I believe, that Justice Scalia and Justice 
> Rehnquist were far more positivistic (and, with respect to 
> law, moral skeptics) than Justice Thomas.  I have cc'd 
> Professor Claeys with respect to this post hoping that he 
> will inform us where these arguments appear, and perhaps join 
> our conversation n the relationship between originalism and 
> moral skepticism.
> 
> Mark A. Graber
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu To 
> subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof
> 
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be 
> viewed as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read 
> messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; 
> and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
> messages to others.
>