Two Cheers for the Constitution of the United States: A Response to Professor Lee J. Strang
Patrick McKinley Brennan
Villanova University School of Law
June 7, 2012
Fordham Law Review, Vol. 80, No. 104, 2012
Villanova Law/Public Policy Research Paper No. 2013-3003
This article is an invited response to Professor Lee Strang’s article Originalism and the Aristotelian Tradition: Virtue’s Home in Originalism, 80 Fordham L. Rev. 1997 (2012). Strang defends original public meaning originalism from a virtue theoretic perspective that he traces to the “central Western tradition” and ultimately to Aristotle. I reply that those committed to that tradition do better (1) to reject original pubic meaning originalism, (2) to embrace some version of original intent originalism, and (3) to defend the original intent meaning of the U.S. Constitution only with important reservations and on certain conditions. The original sin of original public meaning originalism, I argue, is that it illegitimately suppresses the lawgiver. Larry Solum’s argument that we should treat law as a “message in a bottle” provides a vehicle for showing how the lawmaker is not given his or her due in original public meaning originalism.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 12
Keywords: virtue, originalism, original public meaning, lawgiver, separation, church, state, framers
Date posted: September 1, 2012
© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 0.203 seconds