I think originalism is dumb because the last thing I do when I'm looking to solve a complex, real world problem is think "what would a bunch of radical whigs from the 1700s do?"
-
-
This may be true, but it doesn't really strike against originalism, which is usually justified in terms of process (roughly, law needs a conventional foundation to give order, & pursuing OPM is the most plausible interpretive approach re the Constitution) not results.
-
Originalism just strikes me as a desperate attempt by modern conservatives to fend off progressivism without actually having the confidence to make the case for conservative values except inasmuch as they incidentally conform to what the founders happened to say
-
I'm more interested in how pre-modern and early modern societies managed not to collapse into nonsensical liberalism without fetishizing constitutionalism. Seems obvious that broad structural incentives towards a conservative structure are more important than any written barriers
-
I might agree with all that, but it's really a critique of substantive conservative thought, not originalism.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
because originalism can defeat liberal causes that so-called animus can't, and at lower social cost to the proponent. it's the same as with "small government," "federalism," or "individualism."
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I mean his time was insane too just in different wayshttps://mobile.twitter.com/toad_spotted/status/867162659363450880 …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.