Virginia v. Sebelius
whoooo26505 at yahoo.com
Thu Dec 16 13:03:34 PST 2010
... 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.
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.
More information about the Conlawprof