What originalists supposedly look to

Robert Sheridan rs at robertsheridan.com
Fri Apr 16 09:51:47 PDT 2010


So true. Not a great bumpersticker, but so true.

***

Thinking of same, WE, on this list, ought to form a bumper-sticker 
brigade and come up with our own, make that two brigades, or more, for 
the competing views, as in this pitch: Straight from the Conlawprofs, 
get your favorite view of the Constitution. Which Version are you using? 
1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0? Steve Jobs and Bill Gates have nothing on our 
operating system. Changing with the times, Right up to date. Not your 
Grandfather's Constitution. The same one they have in Alaska. Keep the 
change, I'll take Plessy, or Dred Scot.

Oh, well, it was a thought.

rs

Volokh, Eugene wrote:
>
> Before we make generalizations about what originalists supposedly look 
> to, and whether they ignore the Civil War Amendments, we might want to 
> look closely at what actual originalists do. For instance, many 
> originalists – both scholars and some activists – have been looking 
> very closely at the Fourteenth Amendment as to the most recent 
> Fourteenth Amendment controversy, which is whether the right to keep 
> and bear arms should be incorporated against the states. Likewise, 
> many originalist scholars (including conservative ones) have spilled 
> much ink over the Fourteenth Amendment.
>
> I’m sure there are plenty of originalist scholars who focus on the 
> Framing era because that’s what they find especially interesting. 
> Likewise, I’m sure that some people reasonably think that as to 
> particular issues, the 1787-1791 original meaning is more relevant 
> than the 1866-1870 original meaning, since those issues strike them as 
> outside the scope of the Civil War Amendments. (I take it that much of 
> the arguments that people in the Tea Party movement are making fall 
> into that category.)
>
> Likewise, plenty of laypeople who vaguely sympathize with originalism 
> but just don’t know any better – much as, for instance, there are 
> plenty of laypeople who vaguely sympathize with the “living 
> Constitution” model but just haven’t thought carefully about what it 
> means in various areas, such as the right to keep and bear arms. But 
> none of this tells us about what “Originalists” generally do or think.
>
> Eugene
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.


More information about the Conlawprof mailing list