Skip to Main Content

LAW 73840 Originalism Seminar (Prof. Garnett & Judge Thapar): Additional Articles on Originalism

Index to this page

Journals, Law Reviews & Non-Legal Scholarship

  • Full-text searchable journals and law reviews on Lexis+ and Westlaw.
  • Your research may benefit from scholarship in other related but non-legal disciplines such as history, religion, political science and philosophy (among others).

 

Articles on Originalism

(from the Whittington and Sachs Syllabi) arranged by thematic subheadings

 

For assistance, please contact the research librarians at the Kresge Law Library by email: AskUs@nd.edu.

Journals, Law Reviews & Non-legal Scholarship

Journals and Law Reviews are full-text searchable on Lexis+ and Westlaw (which both have far more advanced search options than HeinOnline or an individual journal's webpage).

 

Search for terms like those you have encountered in your course readings (e.g., Article III, federalism, [name of historic figure], original meaning, state's rights, etc.) or use a citator (Shepard's or KeyCite) to locate articles that a known authority (e.g., helpful scholarly article, case, or other source).   

 

 

 

Your research may benefit from scholarship in other related but non-legal disciplines such as history, religion, political science and philosophy (among others). The following databases provide access to a wide variety of sources in these fields.

 

  • Academic Search Complete: A scholarly, multidisciplinary database providing indexing and abstracts for over 10,000 publications, including monographs, reports, conference proceedings, and others. Also includes full-text access to over 5,000 journals. Offers coverage of many areas of academic study including: area studies, history, law, mathematics, psychology, religion & theology, women's studies, and other fields.

 

  • Expanded Academic ASAP: Provides indexing, abstracts, and selected full text for 3,500+ scholarly journals and general interest periodicals embracing all academic disciplines including history, religion, political science and philosophy.

 

For assistance, please contact the research librarians at the Kresge Law Library by email: AskUs@nd.edu.

Theory of Legal Interpretation, Generally

Richard Ekins, Objects of Interpretation, 32 Const. COMMENT. 1 (2017).

 

Cass R. Sunstein, Formalism in Constitutional Theory, 32 Const. COMMENT. 27 (2017).

 

Lawrence B. Solum, Originalism and Constitutional Construction, 82 FORDHAM L. REV. 453 (2013).

 

Randy E. Barnett & Evan D. Bernick, The Letter and the Spirit: A Unified Theory of Originalism, 107 GEO. L.J. 1 (2018).

 

Keith E. Whittington, Extrajudicial Constitutional Interpretation: Three Objections and Responses, 80 N.C. L. REV. 773 (2002).

 

Keith E. Whittington, Constructing a New American Constitution, 27 Const. COMMENT. 119 (2010).

 

Keith E. Whittington, The Status of Unwritten Constitutional Conventions in the United States, 2013 U. ILL. L. REV. 1847 (2013).

 

Keith E. Whittington, Originalism, Constitutional Construction, and the Problem of Faithless Electors, 59 ARIZ. L. REV. 903 (2017).

 

Lawrence B. Solum, The Unity of Interpretation, 90 B.U. L. REV. 551 (2010).

 

Lawrence B. Solum, The Interpretation-Construction Distinction, 27 Const. COMMENT. 95 (2010).

 

Lawrence B. Solum, Originalism and the Unwritten Constitution, 2013 U. ILL. L. REV. 1935 (2013).

 

Randy E. Barnett, “Interpretation and Construction,” Harvard J.L & Pub. Policy (2011)

  • LAW 73840 Assigned Reading

 

Randy E. Barnett, The Gravitational Force of Originalism, 82 FORDHAM L. REV. 411 (2013).

 

Jack M. Balkin, The Roots of the Living Constitution, 92 B.U. L. REV. 1129 (2012).

 

Jack M. Balkin, The New Originalism and the Uses of History, 82 FORDHAM L. REV. 641 (2013).

 

Jack M. Balkin, The Construction of Original Public Meaning, 31 Const. COMMENT. 71 (2016).

 

Gary Lawson, Legal Indeterminacy: Its Cause and Cure, 19 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'y 411 (1996).

 

Christopher R. Green, This Constitution: Constitutional Indexicals as a Basis for Textualist Semi-Originalism, 84 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 1607 (2009).

 

Michael Stokes Paulsen, Does the Constitution Prescribe Rules for Its Own Interpretation, 103 NW. U. L. REV. 857 (2009).

 

Amy Barrett, The Interpretation/Construction Distinction in Constitutional Law, 27 Const. COMMENT. 1 (2010).

 

Mitchell N. Berman, Constitutional Decision Rules, 90 VA. L. REV. 1 (2004).

 

Lee J. Strang, Originalism as Popular Constitutionalism: Theoretical Possibilities and Practical Differences, 87 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 253 (2011).

 

Peter J. Smith, How Different are Originalism and Non-Originalism, 62 Hastings L.J. 707 (2010).

 

John O. McGinnis & Michael B. Rappaport, The Abstract Meaning Fallacy, 2012 U. ILL. L. REV. 737 (2012).

 

Gary Lawson, Dead Document Walking, 92 B.U. L. REV. 1225 (2012).

 

James E. Fleming, The Inclusiveness of the New Originalism, 82 FORDHAM L. REV. 433 (2013).

 

Nelson Lund, Living Originalism: The Magical Mystery Tour, 3 TEX. A&M L. REV. 31 (2015).

 

John O. McGinnis, The Duty of Clarity, 84 GEO. Wash. L. REV. 843 (2016).

 

Richard S. Kay, Construction, Originalist Interpretation and the Complete Constitution, 19 U. PA. J. Const. L. ONLINE 1 (2016-2017).

 

William Baude, Constitutional Liquidation, 71 Stan. L. REV. 1 (2019).

 

Rebecca E. Zietlow, Popular Originalism - The Tea Party Movement and Constitutional Theory, 64 FLA. L. REV. 483 (2012).

 

History of Constitutional Interpretation

David A. Strauss, Common Law Constitutional Interpreta- tion, 63 U. Chi. L. Rev. 877 (1996)

  • LAW 73840 Assigned Reading

 

Frank H. Easterbrook, Textualism and the Dead Hand, 66 GEO. Wash. L. REV. 1119 (1998).

 

Keith E. Whittington, The New Originalism, 2 Geo. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y 599 (2004)

  • LAW 73840 Assigned Reading


Roscoe Pound, Mechanical Jurisprudence, 8 COLUM. L. REV. 605 (1908).

 

E. F. Albertsworth, The Federal Supreme Court and the Super-Structure of the Constitution, 16 A.B.A. J. 565 (1930).

 

Stanley Reed, The Constitution of the United States, 22 A.B.A. J. 601 (1936).

 

Walton H. Hamilton, The Constitution--Apropos of Crosskey, 21 U. CHI. L. REV. 79 (1953).

 

Thomas Reed Powell, Changing Constitutional Phases, 19 B.U. L. REV. 509 (1939).

 

C. Perry Patterson, Supreme Court as a Constituent Convention, 23 TUL. L. REV. 431 (1948-1949).

 

J. A. C. Grant, Our Common Law Constitution, 40 B.U. L. REV. 1 (1960).

 

Charles A. Reich, Mr. Justice Black and the Living Constitution, 76 HARV. L. REV. 673 (1963).

 

Owen M. Fiss, Foreword: The Forms of Justice, 93 HARV. L. REV. 1 (1979).

 

Thomas C. Grey, Do We Have an Unwritten Constitution, 27 Stan L. REV. 703 (1975).

 

Thomas C. Grey, The Constitution as Scripture, 37 Stan. L. REV. 1 (1984).

 

Harry H. Wellington, The Nature of Judicial Review, 91 YALE L.J. 486 (1982).

 

Edward S. Corwin, Constitution v. Constitutional Theory, 19 AM. POL. Sci. REV. 290 (1925).

 

Charles A. Beard, The Living Constitution, 185 Annals Am. Acad. Pol. & Soc. Sci. 29 (1936).

 

Arthur Selwyn Miller, Notes on the Concept of the Living Constitution , 31 GEO. Wash. L. REV. 881 (1963).

 

William J. Brennan Jr., The Constitution of the United States: Contemporary Ratification, 27 S. TEX. L. REV. 433 (1986).

 

James M. Beck, The Future of the Constitution, 19 A.B.A. J. 493 (1933).

 

John J. Parker, Is the Constitution Passing, 19 A.B.A. J. 570 (1933).

 

Martin Diamond, The Federalist on Federalism: Neither a National Nor a Federal Constitution, But a Composition of Both, 86 YALE L.J. 1273 (1977).

 

Walter Berns, Judicial Review and the Rights and Laws of Nature, 1982 Sup. CT. REV. 49 (1982).

 

Robert H. Bork, Neutral Principles and Some First Amendment Problems, 47 IND. L. J. 1 (1971).

 

William H. Rehnquist, Notion of a Living Constitution, 54 TEX. L. REV. 693 (1976).

 

Robert H. Bork, Styles in Constitutional Theory, 26 S. TEX. L.J. 383 (1985).

 

Robert H. Bork, Constitution, Original Intent, and Economic Rights, The , 23 San DIEGO L. REV. 823 (1986).

 

Henry P. Monaghan, Our Perfect Constitution, 56 N.Y.U. L. REV. 353 (1981).

 

Raoul Berger, New Theories of Interpretation: The Activist Flight from the Constitution, 47 OHIO St. L.J. 1 (1986).

 

Raoul Berger, Original Intention in Historical Perspective, 54 GEO. Wash. L. REV. 296 (1985).

 

Earl M. Maltz, The Failure of Attacks on Constitutional Originalism, 4 Const. COMMENT. 43 (1987).

 

Charles Fried, Sonnet LXV and the Blank Ink of the Framers Intention, 100 HARV. L. REV. 751 (1987).

 

Daniel A. Farber, The Originalism Debate: A Guide for the Perplexed, 49 OHIO St. L.J. 1085 (1989).

 

Jeffrey Goldsworthy, Originalism in Constitutional Interpretation, 25 FED. L. REV. 1 (1997).

 

Walter Benn Michaels, A Defense of Old Originalism, 31 W. NEW ENG. L. REV. 21 (2009).

 

Joel Alicea, “Originalism and the Rule of the Dead,” National Affairs (2015)

  • LAW 73840 Assigned Reading

 

Keith E. Whittington, Originalism: A Critical Introduction, 82 FORDHAM L. REV. 375 (2013).

 

Randy E. Barnett, An Originalism for Nonoriginalists, 45 LOY. L. REV. 611 (1999).

 

Lawrence B. Solum, “The Fixation Thesis: The Role of Historical Fact in Original Meaning,” Notre Dame Law  Review (2015): 1, 20-30

  • LAW 73840 Assigned Reading

 

Keith E. Whittington, “The New Originalism,” Georgetown J. L. & Pub. Pol. (2004)

  • LAW 73840 Assigned Reading 

 

Thomas B. Colby & Peter J. Smith, Living Originalism, 59 DUKE L.J. 239 (2009).

 

Mitchell N. Berman & Kevin Toh, On What Distinguishes New Originalism from Old: A Jurisprudential Take, 82 FORDHAM L. REV. 545 (2013).

 

Larry Alexander, Originalism, the Why and the What, 82 FORDHAM L. REV. 539 (2013).

 

Jack M. Balkin, Framework Originalism and the Living Constitution, 103 NW. U. L. REV. 549 (2009).

 

William Baude, Originalism as a Constraint on Judges, 84 U. CHI. L. REV. 2213 (2017).

 

Arthur W. Machen Jr., Elasticity of the Constitution, 14 HARV. L. REV. 200 (1900-1901).

Varieties of Originalism

Caleb Nelson, A Response to Professor Manning, 91 VA. L. REV. 451 (2005).

 

Gary Lawson, On Reading Recipes..and Constitutions, 85 GEO. L.J. 1823 (1997).

 

John O. McGinnis & Michael B. Rappaport, Original Methods Originalism: A New Theory of Interpretation and the Case against Construction, 103 NW. U. L. REV. 751 (2009).

 

Lawrence B. Solum, Originalist Methodology, 84 U. CHI. L. REV. 269 (2017).

 

Gary Lawson, On Reading Recipes..and Constitutions, 85 GEO. L.J. 1823 (1997).

 

Richard S. Kay, Adherence to the Original Intentions in Constitutional Adjudication: Three Objections and Responses, 82 NW. U. L. REV. 226 (1987-1988).

 

Earl Maltz, Some New Thoughts on an Old Problem - The Role of the Intent of the Framers in Constitutional Theory, 63 B.U. L. REV. 811 (1983).

 

Larry Alexander & Saikrishna Prakash, Is That English You're Speaking - Why Intention Free Interpretation Is an Impossibility, 41 San DIEGO L. REV. 967 (2004).

 

Larry Alexander, Telepathic Law, 27 Const. COMMENT. 139 (2010).

 

Stephen E. Sachs, Originalism as a Theory of Legal Change, 38 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'y 817 (2015).

 

Lawrence B. Solum, District of Columbia v. Heller and Originalism, 103 NW. U. L. REV. 923 (2009).

 

John O. McGinnis and Michael B. Rappaport, “Unifying Original Intent and Original Public Meaning,”  Northwestern University Law Review (2019) 

  • Fall 2021 LAW 73840 Assigned Reading 

 

Richard S. Kay, Original Intention and Public Meaning in Constitutional Interpretation, 103 NW. U. L. REV. 703 (2009).

 

Vasan Kesavan & Michael Stokes Paulsen, The Interpretive Force of the Constitution's Secret Drafting History, 91 GEO. L.J. 1113 (2003).

 

Caleb Nelson, Originalism and Interpretive Conventions, 70 U. CHI. L. REV. 519 (2003).

 

Christopher R. Green, Originialism and the Sense-Reference Distinction, 50 St. Louis U. L.J. 555 (2006).

 

John F. Manning, What Divides Textualists from Purposivists, 106 COLUM. L. REV. 70 (2006).

 

Kurt T. Lash, Originalism All the Way Down, 30 Const. COMMENT. 149 (2015).

 

Scott Soames, Deferentialism: A Post-Originalist Theory of Legal Interpretation, 82 FORDHAM L. REV. 597 (2013).

 

Stephen E. Sachs, Originalism without Text, 127 YALE L. J. 156 (2017).

 

Joel Alicea & Donald L. Drakeman, The Limits of New Originalism, 15 U. PA. J. Const. L. 1161 (2013).

 

Originalism and the US Constitution

Michael W. McConnell, On Reading the Constitution , 73 CORNELL L. REV. 359 (1987-1988).

 

Antonin Scalia, “Originalism: The Lesser Evil,” University of Cincinnati Law Review (1989): 849-866 verified

  • LAW 73840 Assigned Reading

 

Michael W. McConnell, Textualism and the Dead Hand of the Past, 66 GEO. Wash. L. REV. 1127 (1998).

 

Lino A. Graglia, Interpreting the Constitution: Posner on Bork, 44 Stan. L. REV. 1019 (1992).

 

Kurt T. Lash, Originalism, Popular Sovereignty, and Reverse Stare Decisis, 93 VA. L. REV. 1437 (2007).

 

Saikrishna B. Prakash, The Misunderstood Relationship between Originalism and Popular Sovereignty, 31 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'y 485 (2008).

 

Randy E. Barnett, We the People: Each and Every One, 123 YALE L. J. 2576 (2014).

 

Andrew G. I. Kilberg, We the People: The Original Meaning of Popular Sovereignty, 100 VA. L. REV. 1061 (2014).

 

Thomas B. Colby, Originalism and the Ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, 107 NW. U. L. REV. 1627 (2013).

 

Christopher R. Green, Constitutional Truthmakers, 32 NOTRE DAME J.L. Ethics & PUB. POL'y 497 (2018).

 

Robert H. Bork, Styles in Constitutional Theory, 26 S. TEX. L.J. 383 (1985).

 

Michael W. McConnell, The Importance of Humility in Judicial Review: A Comment on Ronald Dworkin's Moral Reading of the Constitution, 65 FORDHAM L. REV. 1269 (1997).

 

Keenan D. Kmiec, The Origin and Current Meanings of Judicial Activism, 92 CALIF. L. REV. 1441 (2004).

 

Bradley C. Canon, Defining the Dimensions of Judicial Activism, 66 JUDICATURE 236 (1983).

 

Frank H. Easterbrook, Do Liberals and Conservatives Differ in Judicial Activism, 73 U. COLO. L. REV. 1401 (2002).

 

Ernest A. Young, Judicial Activism and Conservative Politics, 73 U. COLO. L. REV. 1139 (2002).

 

Richard A. Posner, The Rise and Fall of Judicial Self-Restraint, 100 CALIF. L. REV. 519 (2012).

 

Lino A. Graglia, It's Not Constitutionalism, It's Judicial Activism, 19 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'y 293 (1996).

 

Robert H. Bork, Constitution, Original Intent, and Economic Rights, The , 23 San DIEGO L. REV. 823 (1986).

 

Earl Maltz, Foreword: The Appeal of Originalism, 1987 UTAH L. REV. 773 (1987).

 

Steven G. Calabresi, Textualism and the Countermajoritarian Difficulty, 66 GEO. Wash. L. REV. 1373 (1998).

 

Steven G. Calabresi, The Originalist and Normative Case against Judicial Activism: A Reply to Professor Randy Barnett, 103 MICH. L. REV. 1081 (2005).

 

Richard S. Kay, Originalist Values and Constitutional Interpretation, 19 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'y 335 (1996).

 

Randy E. Barnett, Foreword: Judicial Conservatism v. a Principled Judicial Activism, 10 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'y 273 (1987).

 

Randy E. Barnett, Keynote Remarks: Judicial Engagement through the Lens of Lee Optical, 19 GEO. Mason L. REV. 845 (2012).

 

Randy E. Barnett, The Wages of Crying Judicial Restraint, 36 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'y 925 (2013).

 

Randy E. Barnett, The Judicial Duty to Scrutinize Legislation, 48 VAL. U. L. REV. 903 (2014).

 

Mark Pulliam, Unleashing the Least Dangerous Branch: Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes, 22 TEX. REV. L. & POL. 423 (2018).

 

Nelson Lund, Two Faces of Judicial Restraint (or are There More) in McDonald v. City of Chicago, 63 FLA. L. REV. 487 (2011).

 

Douglas W. Kmiec, Natural Law Originalism for the Twenty-First Century - A Principle of Judicial Restraint, Not Invention, 40 Suffolk U. L. REV. 383 (2007).

 

Originalism and Judicial Practice

Antonin Scalia, Originalism: The Lesser Evil, 57 U. Cin. L. Rev. 849 (1989)

  • Fall 2022 & 21 LAW 73840 Assigned Reading

 

David A. Strauss, Common Law Constitutional Interpretation, 63 U. Chi. L. Rev. 877 (1996)

  • Fall 2021 LAW 73840 Assigned Reading

 

Mitchell N. Berman, Originalism is Bunk, 84 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 1

  • Fall 2021 LAW 73840 Assigned Reading

 

Michael W. McConnell, On Reading the Constitution, 73 CORNELL L. REV. 359 (1987-1988).

 

Lino A. Graglia, Interpreting the Constitution: Posner on Bork, 44 Stan. L. REV. 1019 (1992).

 

Kurt T. Lash, Originalism, Popular Sovereignty, and Reverse Stare Decisis, 93 VA. L. REV. 1437 (2007).

 

Saikrishna B. Prakash, The Misunderstood Relationship between Originalism and Popular Sovereignty, 31 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'y 485 (2008).

 

Randy E. Barnett, We the People: Each and Every One, 123 YALE L. J. 2576 (2014).

 

Andrew G. I. Kilberg, We the People: The Original Meaning of Popular Sovereignty, 100 VA. L. REV. 1061 (2014).

 

Thomas B. Colby, Originalism and the Ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, 107 NW. U. L. REV. 1627 (2013).

 

Christopher R. Green, Constitutional Truthmakers, 32 NOTRE DAME J.L. Ethics & PUB. POL'y 497 (2018).

 

Robert H. Bork, Styles in Constitutional Theory, 26 S. TEX. L.J. 383 (1985).

 

Michael W. McConnell, The Importance of Humility in Judicial Review: A Comment on Ronald Dworkin's Moral Reading of the Constitution, 65 FORDHAM L. REV. 1269 (1997).

 

Keenan D. Kmiec, The Origin and Current Meanings of Judicial Activism, 92 CALIF. L. REV. 1441 (2004).

 

Bradley C. Canon, Defining the Dimensions of Judicial Activism, 66 JUDICATURE 236 (1983).

 

Frank H. Easterbrook, Do Liberals and Conservatives Differ in Judicial Activism, 73 U. COLO. L. REV. 1401 (2002).

 

Ernest A. Young, Judicial Activism and Conservative Politics, 73 U. COLO. L. REV. 1139 (2002).

 

Richard A. Posner, The Rise and Fall of Judicial Self-Restraint, 100 CALIF. L. REV. 519 (2012).

 

Lino A. Graglia, It's Not Constitutionalism, It's Judicial Activism, 19 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'y 293 (1996).

 

Robert H. Bork, Constitution, Original Intent, and Economic Rights, The , 23 San DIEGO L. REV. 823 (1986).

 

Earl Maltz, Foreword: The Appeal of Originalism, 1987 UTAH L. REV. 773 (1987).

 

Steven G. Calabresi, Textualism and the Countermajoritarian Difficulty, 66 GEO. Wash. L. REV. 1373 (1998).

 

Steven G. Calabresi, The Originalist and Normative Case against Judicial Activism: A Reply to Professor Randy Barnett, 103 MICH. L. REV. 1081 (2005).

 

Richard S. Kay, Originalist Values and Constitutional Interpretation, 19 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'y 335 (1996).

 

Randy E. Barnett, Foreword: Judicial Conservatism v. a Principled Judicial Activism, 10 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'y 273 (1987).

 

Randy E. Barnett, Keynote Remarks: Judicial Engagement through the Lens of Lee Optical, 19 GEO. Mason L. REV. 845 (2012).

 

Randy E. Barnett, The Wages of Crying Judicial Restraint, 36 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'y 925 (2013).

 

Randy E. Barnett, The Judicial Duty to Scrutinize Legislation, 48 VAL. U. L. REV. 903 (2014).

 

Mark Pulliam, Unleashing the Least Dangerous Branch: Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes, 22 TEX. REV. L. & POL. 423 (2018).

 

Nelson Lund, Two Faces of Judicial Restraint (or are There More) in McDonald v. City of Chicago, 63 FLA. L. REV. 487 (2011).

 

Douglas W. Kmiec, Natural Law Originalism for the Twenty-First Century - A Principle of Judicial Restraint, Not Invention, 40 Suffolk U. L. REV. 383 (2007).

 

Originalism and Theories of Law

Richard H. Fallon Jr., Constitutional Precedent Viewed through the Lens of Hartian Positivist Jurisprudence, 86 N.C. L. REV. 1107 (2008).

 

David A. Strauss, Common Law Constitutional Interpretation, 63 U. Chi. L. Rev. 877 (1996)

  • Fall 2021 LAW 73840 Assigned Reading 

 

Stephen E. Sachs, The Constitution in Exile as a Problem for Legal Theory, 89 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 2253 (2014).

 

William Baude, Is Originalism Our Law, 115 COLUM. L. REV. 2349 (2015).

 

Jeffrey A. Pojanowski & Kevin C. Walsh, Enduring Originalism, 105 GEO. L.J. 97 (2016).

 

William Baude & Stephen E. Sachs, The Law of Interpretation, 130 HARV. L. REV. 1079 (2017).

 

William Baude & Stephen E. Sachs, Grounding Originalism, 113 NW. U. L. REV. 1455 (2019).

 

James A. Gardner, Positivist Foundations of Originalism: An Account and Critique, 71 B.U. L. REV. 1 (1991).

 

Matthew D. Adler, Interpretive Contestation and Legal Correctness, 53 WM. & MARY L. REV. 1115 (2012).

 

Andre LeDuc, Paradoxes of Positivism and Pragmatism in the Debate about Originalism, 42 OHIO N.U. L. REV. 613 (2016).

 

Charles L. Barzun, The Positive U-Turn, 69 Stan. L. REV. 1323 (2017).

 

Richard Primus, Is Theocracy Our Politics?, 116 COLUM. L. REV. ONLINE 44 (2016).

 

Originalism and Precedent

Gary Lawson, Stare Decisis and Constitutional Meaning: Panel II - The Constitutional Case against Precedent, 17 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'y 23 (1994).

 

John Harrison, Power of Congress over the Rules of Precedent, The , 50 DUKE L.J. 503 (2000).

 

William Baude, The Judgment Power, 96 GEO. L.J. 1807 (2008).

 

Henry Paul Monaghan, Stare Decisis and Constitutional Adjudication, 88 COLUM. L. REV. 723 (1988).

 

Gary Lawson, Stare Decisis and Constitutional Meaning: Panel II - The Constitutional Case against Precedent, 17 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'y 23 (1994).

 

Caleb Nelson, Stare Decisis and Demonstrably Erroneous Precedents, 87 VA. L. REV. 1 (2001).

 

Randy E. Barnett, Trumping Precedent with Original Meaning: Not as Radical as It Sounds, 22 Const. COMMENT. 257 (2005).

 

Michael Stokes Paulsen, The Intrinsically Corrupting Influence of Precedent, 22 Const. COMMENT. 289 (2005).

 

Thomas W. Merrill, Originalism, Stare Decisis and the Promotion of Judicial Restraint, 22 Const. COMMENT. 271 (2005).

 

Lee J. Strang, An Originalist Theory of Precedent: Originalism, Nonoriginalist Precedent, and the Common Good, 36 N.M. L. REV. 419 (2006).

 

John O. McGinnis & Michael B. Rappaport, Reconciling Originalism and Precedent, 103 NW. U. L. REV. 803 (2009).

 

John O. McGinnis & Michael B. Rappaport, Originalism and Precedent, 34 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'y 121 (2011).

 

Nelson Lund, Stare Decisis and Originalism: Judicial Disengagement from the Supreme Court's Errors, 19 GEO. Mason L. REV. 1029 (2012).

 

Leslie F. Goldstein, Original Meaning, Precedent, and Popular Sovereignty: Whittington et al. v. Lincoln et al., 82 FORDHAM L. REV. 783 (2013).

 

Amy Coney Barrett, “Originalism and Stare Decisis,” Notre Dame Law Review (2017)

  • Fall 2022 & 21 LAW 73840 Assigned Reading

 

Randy J. Kozel, Original Meaning and the Precedent Fallback, 68 VAND. L. REV. 105 (2015).

 

Originalism in Interdisciplinary Context

Helen Irving, Outsourcing the Law: History and the Disciplinary Limits of Constitutional Reasoning, 84 FORDHAM L. REV. 957 (2015).

 

Jack N. Rakove, Joe the Ploughman Reads the Constitution, or, the Poverty of Public Meaning Originalism, 48 San DIEGO L. REV. 575 (2011).

 

Gary Lawson & Guy Seidman, Orginalism as a Legal Enterprise, 23 Const. COMMENT. 47 (2006).

 

Saul Cornell, Meaning and Understanding in the History of Constitutional Ideas: The Intellectual History Alternative to Originalism, 82 FORDHAM L. REV. 721 (2013).

 

William Baude & Stephen E. Sachs, Originalism and the Law of the Past, 37 LAW & Hist. REV. 809 (2019).

 

Jack M. Balkin, Abortion and Original Meaning, 24 Const. COMMENT. 291 (2007).

 

Adrian Vermeule, Beyond Originalism, Atlantic, Mar. 31, 2020 

  • Fall 2021 LAW 73840 Assigned Reading

 

Arguments Against Originalism

 

Richard A. Posner, Bork and Beethoven, 42 Stan. L. REV. 1365 (1990).

 

Ernest Young, Rediscovering Conservatism: Burkean Political Theory and Constitutional Interpretation, 72 N.C. L. REV. 619 (1994).

 

Hadley Arkes, A Natural Law Manifesto or an Appeal from the Old Jurisprudence to the New, 87 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 1245 (2012).

 

Richard A. Epstein, Beyond Textualism: Why Originalist Theory Must Apply General Principles of Interpretation to Constitutional Law, 37 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'y 705 (2014).

 

Steven D. Smith, Writing of the Constitution and the Writing on the Wall, The, 19 HARV. J. L. & PUB. POL'y 391 (1996).

 

Tara Smith, Originalism's Misplaced Fidelity: Original Meaning is Not Objective, 26 Const. COMMENT. 1 (2009).

 

Edward J. Erler, “Don’t Read the Constitution the Way Robert Bork Did,” American Greatness (2019) 

 

Michael O’Shea, “Normative Foundations of Originalism,” Law and Liberty (2019)

 

Paul Brest, The Misconceived Quest for the Original Understanding, 60 B.U. L. REV. 204 (1980).

 

H. Jefferson Powell, The Original Understanding of Original Intent, 98 HARV. L. REV. 885 (1985).

 

Mitchell Berman, “Originalism is Bunk,” NYU Law Review (2009): 1, 59-96

  • Fall 2021 LAW 73840 Assigned Reading

 

Cass R. Sunstein, Originalism, 93 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 1671 (2018).

 

Stephen R. Munzer & James W. Nickel, Does the Constitution Mean What It Always Meant, 77 COLUM. L. REV. 1029 (1977).

 

Robert N. Clinton, Original Understanding, Legal Realism, and the Interpretation of 'This Constitution', 72 IOWA L. REV. 1177 (1987).

 

Mark Tushnet, U.S. Constitution and the Intent of the Framers, The, 36 BUFF. L. REV. 217 (1987).

 

Ronald Dworkin, The Arduous Virtue of Fidelity: Originalism, Scalia, Tribe, and Nerve, 83 FORDHAM L. REV. 2221 (2015).

 

Robert W. Bennett, Objectivity In Constitutional Law , 132 U. PA. L. REV. 445 (1984).

 

Larry G. Simon, The Authority of the Framers of the Constitution: Can Originalist Interpretation be Justified, 73 CALIF. L. REV. 1482 (1985).

 

Samuel Freeman, Constitutional Democracy and the Legitimacy of Judicial Review, 9 LAW & PHIL. 327 (1990).

 

Michael C. Dorf, Integrating Normative and Descriptive Constitutional Theory: The Case of Original Meaning, 85 GEO. L.J. 1765 (1997).

 

Mark D. Greenberg & Harry Litman, The Meaning of Original Meaning, 86 GEO. L.J. 569 (1998).

 

Stephen M. Griffin, Rebooting Originalism, 2008 U. ILL. L. REV. 1185 (2008).

 

Andrew B. Coan, Irrelevance of Writtenness in Constitutional Interpretation, 158 U. PA. L. REV. 1025 (2010).

 

Christopher J. Peters, What Lies Beneath: Interpretive Methodology, Constitutional Authority, and the Case of Originalism, 2013 BYU L. REV. 1251 (2013).

 

Thomas B. Colby, The Sacrifice of the New Originalism, 99 GEO. L.J. 713 (2011).

 

Ian Bartrum, Two Dogmas of Originalism, 7 Wash. U. Jurisprudence REV. 157 (2015).

 

David A. Strauss, Does the Constitution Mean What It Says, 129 HARV. L. REV. 1 (2015).

 

Cass R. Sunstein, There Is Nothing That Interpretation Just Is, 30 Const. COMMENT. 193 (2015).

 

Richard H. Fallon Jr., The Meaning of Legal Meaning and Its Implications for Theories of Legal Interpretation, 82 U. CHI. L. REV. 1235 (2015).

 

Kresge Law Library Footer