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.
Payez facilement par carte, Klarna, Apple Pay ou Google Pay. Pas satisfait ? Vous avez toujours une garantie de remboursement de 14 jours. En savoir plus dans nos conditions. Si vous avez des questions, envoyez-nous un e-mail à hello@memmo.org.
Memmo facilite tes études, où que tu sois dans le monde. On rassemble tes manuels de cours et des outils d'étude intelligents au même endroit : résumés, quiz, podcasts et flashcards. Et il y a Ted, ton compagnon d'étude qui répond à toutes tes questions. Plus de 50 000 étudiants étudient déjà ici – conçu pour t'aider à apprendre plus vite et à moins stresser.