McGinnis, John O.; Rappaport, Michael B.
June 2008
Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy;Summer2008, Vol. 31 Issue 3, p917
Academic Journal
An essay on pragmatic defense of originalism, an approach to interpret the U.S. Constitution, is presented. It stresses that entrenched laws should be prioritize over ordinary legislation because they function to create a structure of U.S. government that maintains democratic decision-making and individual rights. It cites some of the reasons why supermajoritarian entrenchment is superior and desirable. It emphasizes the need to enforce the original meaning of the constitution.


Related Articles

  • Law and morality. George, Robert P. // World & I;Mar94, Vol. 9 Issue 3, p384 

    Comments on Gerard Bradley's essay, `New Constitutional Covenant.' Types of American morality. Popular or common morality; Elite morality; Culture war as a significant measure of class war; New understanding for the role of the judiciary; Relationship between judicial decision and popular will;...

  • THE DISPOSING POWER OF THE LEGISLATURE. Merrill, Thomas W. // Columbia Law Review;Mar2010, Vol. 110 Issue 2, p452 

    The Constitution as we understand it includes principles that have emerged over time in a common law fashion. One such principle is the disposing power of the legislature-the understanding that only the legislature has the power to arrange, order, and distribute the power to act with the force...

  • SODOMY AND GUNS: TRADITION AS DEMOCRATIC DELIBERATION AND CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION. Eskridge Jr., William N. // Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy;Winter2009, Vol. 32 Issue 1, p193 

    An essay about the tradition in constitutional law interpretation in the U.S. with reference to sodomy and gun litigations is presented. The author characterizes constitutional tradition as multifarious, evolving and complicated, and notes that these aspects may create the risks of anachronism,...

  • TEXT VS. PRECEDENT IN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. Calabresi, Steven G. // Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy;Summer2008, Vol. 31 Issue 3, p947 

    An essay on the arguments of textualists and originalists on the theory of stare decisis in the U.S. constitutional law is presented. It explains the reasons why doctrinalists are wrong in contending for a strong theory of stare decisis. It details several cases where the Supreme Court overruled...

  • ORDINARY ADMINISTRATIVE LAW AS CONSTITUTIONAL COMMON LAW. Metzger, Gillian E. // Columbia Law Review;Mar2010, Vol. 110 Issue 2, p479 

    Henry Monaghan famously argued that much of constitutional interpretation takes the form of what he termed constitutional common law, a body of doctrines and rules that are constitutionally inspired but not constitutionally required and that can be altered or reversed by Congress. This Essay...

  • JOHN PAUL STEVENS, ORIGINALIST. Amann, Diane Marie // Northwestern University Law Review;2012, Vol. 106 Issue 2, p743 

    Commentators, including the author of a recent book on the Supreme Court, often attempt to give each Justice a methodological label, such as "practitioner of judicial restraint," "legal realist," "pragmatist," or "originalist." This Essay first demonstrates that none of the first three labels...

  • Age doesn't save False Claims Act.  // Defense Counsel Journal;Jan1998, Vol. 65 Issue 1, p144 

    States that the False Claims Act is unconstitutional under the separation of powers doctrine insofar as it attempts to confer standing on qui tam plaintiffs who have suffered no cognizable injury under Article III. Observation of the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas;...

  • APPENDIX G: THE CONSTITUTION.  // Your U.S. Citizenship Guide: What You Need to Know to Pass Your ;2008, p211 

    The article highlights the constitution of the U.S., written in 1787, that appeared in the "Your U.S. Citizenship Guide: What You Need to Know to Pass Your U.S. Citizenship Test" is presented.

  • Types. Fried, Charles // Constitutional Commentary;Spring97, Vol. 14 Issue 1, p55 

    Discusses the dichotomy between an effects test and an intents test in the constitutional doctrine. Provisions limiting official exercises of authority; Natural primacy of effects tests; Difference between an effects test and an intents test; Natural strategy for determining an individual's...


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics