Well, here we go again. With Neil Gorsuch as the current Supreme Court nominee, once more we hear praises of "originalism
If the text of Article III, enriched by the publicly available context in which it was enacted, communicated the concept
The enduring appeal and influence of originalism is attributable in substantial part to its promised capacity to maintain
More importantly, I believe that systematic deference to the government in constitutional cases is inconsistent with the
Calls for judges to be constrained by the Constitution's original meaning are entirely proper--and important.
What the Court does in speech cases -- namely, engage in a genuine effort to identify government officials' true ends and assess their propriety -- it can and should do in all constitutional settings.
When any religious person claims that a sacred text is "dead" -- in that the understanding of its meaning is fixed forever -- they are directly at odds with their own idea of a living, active God
Justice Roberts would like us to reminisce wistfully about a day when judges are umpires of the law. But I don't think that
GOP leaders who refuse to hold confirmation hearings and attempt to prevent President Obama from making an appointment violate the legacy of the man they seek to replace.