Originalism versus Living Constitutionalism: The Conceptual Structure of the Great Debate

54 Pages Posted: 8 Feb 2019

Date Written: January 11, 2019

Abstract

This Essay explores the conceptual structure of the great debate about “originalism” and “living constitutionalism.” The core of the great debate is substantive and addresses the normative question, “What is the best theory of constitutional interpretation and construction?” That question leads to others, including questions about the various forms and variations of originalism and living constitutionalism. Originalists argue that the meaning of the constitutional text is fixed and that it should bind constitutional actors. Living constitutionalists contend that constitutional law can and should evolve in response to changing circumstances and values. This Essay advances a metalinguistic proposal for classifying theories as originalist or living constitutionalist and suggests that some constitutional theories are hybrids, combining elements of both theories.

Keywords: constitution, constitutional theory, originalism, living constitutionalism, concepts, conceptions, metalinguistic

Suggested Citation

Solum, Lawrence B., Originalism versus Living Constitutionalism: The Conceptual Structure of the Great Debate (January 11, 2019). Northwestern University Law Review, Vol. 113, No. 6, 2019. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3324264 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3324264

Lawrence B. Solum (Contact Author)

Georgetown University Law Center ( email )

600 New Jersey Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
281
Abstract Views
734
PlumX Metrics