Is Roberts a "Strict Constructionist"?

[Sanford Levinson]

Marty quotes a passage from Roberts's casenote accept the Blaisdell majority's description of the Contracts Clause as one of the Constitution's "general clauses, which afford a broad outline" and therefore require "construction . . . to fill in the details."  Quite obviously, a central question is how Roberts, the Court, or anyone else is supposed to discertn that the CC is "general" rather than quite particular.  There's certainly noting in the language itself to suggest that "no law" doesn't mean "no law," as Hugo Black said was the case for both the First Amendment AND the CC.  
 
sandy

 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20050725/d593fa64/attachment.htm