What should we call those who enacted the Constitution?
Mike Rappaport
There is a problem of terminology that afflicts originalist scholarship. What should we call those who enacted the Constitution? Traditionally, scholars referred to them as the Framers, but that was often understood to mean the drafters of the Constitution at the Philadelphia Convention. If one doesn't think that group has special authority — and […]
Originalism in the Blogs: Non-Originalist Textualism
Michael Ramsey
Tom W. Bell, at Agoraphilia: Original Meaning v. Consent of the Governed. Professor Bell is a leading proponent of what I would call “non-originalist textualism” (that is, as he puts it in this post, adhering to the “plain, present, public meaning of [the] constitutional terms” rather than their original meaning). This post is a great […]
Originalism in the Blogs: Final Posts on Collective Action Federalism
Michael Ramsey
At Volokh Conspiracy, Kurt Lash and Neil Siegel make their final posts as guest bloggers on collective action federalism. This has been an extraordinarily sophisticated yet helpful and accessible discussion that shouldn’t be missed by anyone with an interest in federalism.
Originalism on the Web: Overselling the Tenth Amendment
Michael Ramsey
Steve Chapman, at reason.com: Phony Federalism – The Republican Party is a fickle friend to the Tenth Amendment. I’m sympathetic to constitutional federalism and I think Chapman has a point in his central argument (that modern Republicans talk a lot about local control but “[w]hen there is a conflict between state sovereignty and conservative policies, […]
Originalism in the Blogs
Michael Ramsey
Walter Olson, at Cato@Liberty: International Law and the Founding Era (with a quote from this blog).
Originalism in the Blogs
Michael Ramsey
Steven Schwinn: Debating the Progressive Constitution.
Originalism in the Blogs: More on Collective Action Federalism
Michael Ramsey
At Volokh Conspiracy, guest-bloggers Kurt Lash and Neil Siegel have posted their initial contributions on collective action federalism, an important exchange about the scope of Congress' Article I, Section 8 powers. Professor Lash's posts are here and here; Professor Siegel's are here and here. UPDATE: Further posts here and here.
Originalism in the Blogs
Michael Ramsey
This week The Volokh Conspiracy will feature Kurt Lash (Illinois) and Neil Siegel (Duke) guest-blogging about "collective action federalism." As Professor Volokh explains it: According to collective action federalism, the clauses of Section 8 empower Congress to solve collective action problems that predictably frustrate the states. In the language of the Commerce Clause, such problems […]
Kurt Lash: The Virginia Plan and Authority to Resolve ‘Collective Action Problems’ Under Article I, Section 8
Michael Ramsey
Kurt T. Lash (University of Illinois College of Law) has posted ‘Resolution VI’: The Virginia Plan and Authority to Resolve 'Collective Action Problems' Under Article I, Section 8 (Illinois Public Law Research Paper No. 10-40) on SSRN. This is an important piece by a leading originalist scholar on a core issue of federalism. Here is […]
Substantive Due Process Part II: Ryan Williams’s Basic Argument
Mike Rappaport
In my previous post, I discussed the evolution of my views on Substantive Due Process. In this post, I will begin to discuss Ryan Williams excellent new article on Substantive Due Process. In The One and Only Substantive Due Process Clause, Ryan Williams argues that the original meaning of the Due Process Clause of the […]