Penumbral Reasoning on the Right

Abstract:     
The use of penumbral reasoning in cases like Griswold v. Connecticut has received considerable criticism from so-called conservative constitutional commentators, most notably Robert Bork. This essay demonstrates that penumbral reasoning is also widely used by courts in service of results generally regarded as conservative, with much less controversy. Penumbral reasoning, it suggests, is an essential implement in the judicial toolbox, and worthy of more respect, and use, from courts that care about fidelity to constitutional text and structure.

Keywords: penumbral, constitutional law, Robert Bork, Griswold

Accepted Paper Series