|
||||
|
||||
It's a Bird, it's a Plane, No, it's Super Precedent: A Response to Faber and GerhardtRandy E. BarnettGeorgetown University Law Center March 15, 2012 Minnesota Law Review, Vol. 90, 2006 Georgetown Public Law Research Paper No. 12-048 Abstract: The normative case for originalism is based, in large measure, on the superiority of the enacted text over the opinions of members of the government whom it is supposed to govern and limit-including members of the Supreme Court. The author does not see how an originalist can accept that the Supreme Court could change the meaning of the text from what it meant as enacted and still remain an originalist. In other words, once it becomes appropriate for the Supreme Court to discard original meaning and the original meaning of the text is thereby reduced to a factor among many considerations by which the Constitution is "interpreted," the method being used is no longer originalism.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 21 Keywords: Originalism, Constitutional interpretation, Stare decisis, Judicial review JEL Classification: K00, K1, K3 Accepted Paper SeriesDate posted: March 15, 2012Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
|||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.406 seconds