Originalism is an enormously popular—and equally criticized—theory of constitutional interpretation. As Elena Kagan stated at her confirmation hearing, "We are all originalists." Scores of articles have been written on whether the Court should use originalism, and some have examined how the Court employed originalism in particular cases, but no one has studied the overall practice of originalism.
The primary point of this book is an examination of the degree to which originalism influences the Court's decisions. Frank B. Cross tests this by examining whether originalism appears to constrain the ideological preferences of the justices, which are a demonstrable predictor of their decisions. Ultimately, he finds that however theoretically appealing originalism may seem, the changed circumstances over time and lack of reliable evidence means that its use is indeterminate and meaningless. Originalism can be selectively deployed or manipulated to support and legitimize any decision desired by a justice.
Paga fácilmente con tarjeta, Klarna, Apple Pay o Google Pay. ¿No estás contento? Siempre tienes 14 días de garantía de devolución. Lee más en nuestros términos. Si tienes preguntas, escríbenos a hello@memmo.org.
Memmo hace que estudiar sea más fácil, estés donde estés. Aquí tienes tus libros de texto y herramientas de estudio inteligentes en un solo lugar: resúmenes, quizzes, podcasts y flashcards. Y también a Ted, tu compañero de estudio que responde a todo lo que te preguntes. Más de 50 000 estudiantes ya estudian aquí. Está hecho para que aprendas más rápido y te estreses menos.