The burgeoning debates about constitutional interpretation show no signs of abating. With surprisingly few exceptions, however, those debates involve a contrast between textualism understood as some form of originalism, on the one hand, and various varieties of less textually focused living constitutionalism, on the other. In conflating textualism with originalism, however, the existing debates ignore the possibility of a non-originalist textualism – a textualism tethered not to original intent and not to original public meaning but, instead, to contemporary public meaning – public meaning now. This article explains the plausibility of just such an “unoriginal” textualism and argues that it might serve the guidance and constraint functions of a constitution better than any of the alternatives now on offer.
Citation
Frederick Schauer, Unoriginal Textualism, 90 George Washington Law Review, 825 (2022).
More in This Category
An upcoming Supreme Court case on Article III standing and disability presents critical questions about the future of litigation that promotes...
More
Matthew Waxman
Congress may want to prevent nuclear command and control from going fully autonomous. Would such a law be constitutional?
More
In our increasingly polarized society, claims that prosecutions are politically motivated, racially motivated, or just plain arbitrary are more common...
More
When federal judges are called on to adjudicate separation-of-powers disputes, they are not mere arbiters of the separation of powers. By resolving a...
More
In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization , the Supreme Court distinguished between different kinds of reliance interests — some that would...
More
This story begins with one parent who took his demands for equal educational opportunity for his children all the way to the highest court of our land...
More
Life tenure for the federal judiciary doesn’t promote judicial independence or the development of law as the Framers expected, and should be repealed...
More
Do legal concepts alter how we understand the past and present? The jurisprudence of race suggests that they do. For several decades, federal courts...
More
A new study shows that lower court judges, and especially conservatives, are using senior status as a loophole to ensure their replacement by a like...
More
A division exists between scholars who claim that Congress made only limited delegations to executive officials in the early Republic, and those who...
More
Quinta Jurecic
In 2018, Congress rightly highlighted the problem of sex trafficking, which is a moral abomination and vicious scourge. It condemned sites like...
More
Mark Tushnet
The idea of judicial dialogue entered into scholarly discussion in the late twentieth century and is used in connection with different phenomena at...
More
Erin F. Delaney
Studies of federalism, especially in the United States, have mostly centered on state autonomy and the vertical relationship between the states and...
More
Tom Ginsberg
Constitutional review is the power of a body, usually a court, to assess whether law or government action complies with the constitution. Originating...
More
Constitutional law has a great deal to say about what symbols are permitted in the public square. Somewhat baroque legal rules (sometimes created...
More
The recently enacted Respect for Marriage Act is important bipartisan legislation that will protect same-sex marriage should the Supreme Court...
More
An important question in legal theory and policy is when people are willing to put aside their policy preferences to uphold higher-order legal values...
More