Articles tagged as Originalism
-
“A Jurisprudential Red Pill: Part I” — Evelyn Blacklock
Evelyn Blacklock reviews Prof. Adrian Vermeule's "Common Good Constitutionalism," which argues that both originalism and living constitutionalism have abandoned the classical legal tradition. -
“The Conservative Legal Movement Sputters” — Josh Hammer in the Spectator World
Taking an honest look at today’s conservative jurisprudence, Josh Hammer calls for a return to the Bible, natural law, and the substantive precepts underpinning our constitutional order. Some excerpts: “A sober, empirical assessment of the past four decades paints an ambiguous picture of substantive conservative success in US courthouses. It is simply not obvious how […] -
“‘It’s Good (Not) to be the King’: Qualified Praise for Michael McConnell” — Garrett Snedeker
Anchoring Truths co-founder Garrett Snedeker offers qualified praise for Prof. Michael McConnell’s recent book on executive power under the Constitution. While McConnell argues convincingly for public meaning originalism, he implicitly reaffirms judicial supremacy over interpretive disputes between the legislative and the executive branches. “McConnell’s most significant contribution to the scholarly literature is his thorough evaluation of Article II with a […] -
“Once More Unto the Breach” — Hadley Arkes
In a response to Ed Whelan’s critique of “On Overturning Roe,” Prof. Arkes insists that the moral argument against Roe is the only logical one for judges who believe in the deep wrong of abortion. The pro-life cause rests on objective moral truths, not on value judgments, and as a result does not require judges […] -
Podcast at First Things: Hadley Arkes and R. R. Reno discuss “On Overruling Roe”
Professor Hadley Arkes and First Things editor R. R. Reno talk about Arkes’s recent article, “On Overruling Roe,” focusing on originalist jurisprudence, the relevance of natural law to abortion, and the Dobbs case. firstthings · Hadley Arkes on Roe v. Wade “On Overruling Roe” may be read here. Listen to the podcast here. -
“Originalism Is Not Enough” — Hadley Arkes in Claremont Review of Books
In a review of Drakeman’s The Hollow Core of Constitutional Theory: Why We Need the Framers, Prof. Hadley Arkes contends that, when debating moral issues such as abortion and freedom of religion, judges should look beyond the text of the Constitution to the principles underpinning it. The Framers themselves disagreed on constitutional interpretation, and it’s […] -
“Recovering a Conservative State Legal Theory” — Jeffrey Bristol in Anchoring Truths and Law & Liberty
Responding to Holden Tanner and Jesse Merriam, Jeffrey Bristol argues that state courts limit themselves by adopting the same sort of originalism as federal courts–and that Erie, far from wrenching common law reasoning from the states, actually returned state courts to power. Some excerpts: “It may seem surprising to say that originalism ignores state power. […] -
‘Dobbs’ and the Conservative Legal Movement – Gerald V. Bradley in National Catholic Register
James Wilson Institute’s Senior Scholar, Gerry Bradley, writes in the National Catholic Register about Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization and how if Roe is overturned, it would not necessarily mean the end of abortion or even the beginning of the end of it. Some excerpts from the piece: “Although the conservative legal movement has […] -
“Judge Pryor’s Friendly Fire” — Hadley Arkes at Law & Liberty
Prof. Arkes defends “A Better Originalism” against Judge William Pryor’s critique, arguing that the work of natural law doesn’t end with the Constitution: judges must continually consult natural law principles as they apply the law to individual circumstances. Some excerpts: “I’ve counted myself a friend of William Pryor since I encountered him years ago as […] -
“Whelan-Arkes Exchange: Last Round” — Hadley Arkes
Hadley Arkes responds to Edward Whelan in the last of five pieces on Originalism and the rightful place of moral reasoning. Appeals to Scalia only reinforce the position of common-good originalists: that conservative judges have forgotten the objective moral truths which once governed American jurisprudence. (Links to the other four pieces, in order of publication, can […]