Ironically, as I discuss, originalist literature on 13-15 amendments is large enough to have generated criticisms to effect that 1) originalists are too "optimistic" about original meaning of amendments, and 2) they disagree among themselves so much, that theory is indeterminate.
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Nice piece, Ilya. FWIW I think Bouie has a kind of Amar/Lash type of view in mind.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Not enough literature to avoid overturning the voting rights act apparently.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Now do the voting rights act
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
They ignore it when they aren’t writing about it, duh!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
So originalists are capable of accepting ratifications to the constitution made almost a hundred yrs later and are able to apply it in the same way as the constitution but not capable of doing the same thing to additional laws adopted after that? Why? And again, why at all.
-
My father told me once that he was a Catholic because the rules never change, (he just chose which ones to follow
) is that what this is for you guys? You need things to be concrete and never moving so you always know how you stand? - Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
How much in favor vs how much against?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Just FYI article says "Janelle" and should be "Jamelle"
-
Thx, Will fix!
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.