Virginia v. Sebelius

[Sean Wilson]

... here is what I don't understand about any of this. I haven't read hardly a 
thing. My mail filters and delete finger handle the issue. But my question is: 
why is it not seen that the whole matter amounts to "ideology" in the worst 
sense of the idea, and, as well, amounts to extremely poor philosophy and a kind 
of missionary campaign? What I don't understand is why originalism is indulged 
as anything but a dogma.  

If one would have such a confusion, you would (as an academic), engage it. But 
if what Wittgenstein called "therapy" was of no use, why would the matter be of 
interest? It's curious to me why any academic would attend a carnival.  
 

Regards and thanks.

Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
Assistant Professor
Wright State University
Personal Website: http://seanwilson.org
SSRN papers: http://ssrn.com/author=596860
New Discussion Groups! http://ludwig.squarespace.com/discussionfora/




----- Original Message ----
From: Douglas Laycock <dlaycock at virginia.edu>
To: conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
Sent: Thu, December 16, 2010 3:30:29 PM
Subject: Re: Virginia v. Sebelius

Why are so many people untroubled by this complaint?

Fundamentally, because we don't believe the Founders forbad us to learn anything 
from experience in the field of constitutional interpretation. Because they 
voted on and ratified the constitutional text and never voted on or ratified all 
your evidence of original understanding or meaning. Because we don't believe you 
know the original understanding or meaning -- certainly not with anything 
remotely like the precision you claim. Because the transportation and 
communication revolutions fundamentally altered the practical meaning of 
commerce and of "among the states." 


The list goes on, but those are the ones that most quickly leap to mind.