Succinct and careful testimony in favor of originalism

On Thursday morning, law professor and blogger Lawrence Solum will be testifying at the Gorsuch hearings about originalism. His testimony is available online and it is a succinct (12 double-spaced pages) and yet quite careful explanation of the core idea of originalism. I will resist the temptation to post the whole thing, but here is the introduction:

The next part refutes four myths about originalism:

  • Myth Number One: Originalists Try to Channel James Madison
  • Myth Number Two: Originalists Cannot Apply the Constitution to New Circumstances
  • Myth Number Three: Originalism Would Require that Brown v. Board be Overruled
  • Myth Number Four: Originalism is Inconsistent with Precedent

Solum then turns to originalism’s consistency with modern jurisprudence, the normative arguments for it, and responds to some objections, such as the “dead hand” and the problem of “law office history.”

These may be obvious points to readers familiar with the originalism debates, but I frequently see ignorance of them by folks who really should know better.

Originally Found On: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/03/23/succinct-and-careful-testimony-in-favor-of-originalism/

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s