Originalism: Can Theory and Supreme Court Practice be Reconciled?
After originalism was dealt a series of seemingly devastating blows in the ’80s, originalist scholarship evolved in significant ways. One of the most noteworthy changes is the evolution from intentionalism to original public meaning originalism. Now, most modern originalists agree the appropriate inquiry for interpreting the Constitution is the original public meaning of the text. Nonetheless, originalists on the Supreme Court have continued invoking Framers’ intentions, interpretations, and expectations in their constitutional interpretations. This Note explores how recent self-proclaimed originalist Supreme Court Justices—Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Gorsuch—have appealed to the views of the Framers, and whether or not these practices can be grounded in public meaning originalist theory.
Keep Reading Originalism: Can Theory and Supreme Court Practice be Reconciled?Subscribe to GJLPP