Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Digital Commons Network

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

PDF

University of Richmond

Law Faculty Publications

Constitutional theory

Articles 1 - 12 of 12

Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network

Judge Posner, Judge Wilkinson, And Judicial Critique Of Constitutional Theory, Kevin C. Walsh Jan 2014

Judge Posner, Judge Wilkinson, And Judicial Critique Of Constitutional Theory, Kevin C. Walsh

Law Faculty Publications

Judge Richard Posner's well-known view is that constitutional theory is useless. And Judge J Harvie Wilkinson III has lambasted constitutional theory for the way in which its "cosmic" aspirations threaten democratic self-governance. Many other judges hold similar views. And yet both Posner and Wilkinson-in the popular press, in law review articles, and in books-have advocated what appear to be their own theories of how to judge in constitutional cases. Judicial pragmatism for Posner and judicial restraint for Wilkinson seem to be substitutes for originalism, living constitutionalism, political process theory, and so on. But both Posner and Wilkinson also deny that …


Originalism All The Way Down?, Kurt T. Lash Jan 2014

Originalism All The Way Down?, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

In their new book, Originalism and the Good Constitution, John McGinnis and Michael Rappaport attempt to vanquish what they call constructionist originalism with an approach that I call methodist originalism. Unlike constructionist theories, which allow for non-originalist construction of underdetermined texts, methodist originalism proposes filling in the historical gaps with what McGinnis and Rappaport claim were the originally accepted methods of interpretation. This is originalism all the way down.

It’s a creative effort, and one that appropriately rejects some of the more latitudinous originalist theories currently in play. Unfortunately, the same history McGinnis and Rappaport rely upon fatally undermines …


Of Inkblots And Originalism: Historical Ambiguity And The Case Of The Ninth Amendment, Kurt T. Lash Jan 2008

Of Inkblots And Originalism: Historical Ambiguity And The Case Of The Ninth Amendment, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

Ever since Justice Goldberg's concurring opinion in Griswold v. Connecticut, the Ninth Amendment has been a flashpoint in debates over the merits of originalism as an interpretive theory. Judge Bork's comparison of interpreting the Ninth Amendment to reading a text obscured by an inkblot has been particularly subjected to intense criticism. The metaphor has been attacked as erasing the Ninth Amendment from the Constitution, and as representing the inevitably selective and inconsistent use of

text and history by so-called originalists.

It turns out, however, that not only was Judge Bork right to reject Justice Goldberg's reading of the Ninth Amendment, …


Three Myths Of The Ninth Amendment, Kurt T. Lash Jan 2008

Three Myths Of The Ninth Amendment, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

The breathtakingly broad language of the Ninth Amendment is both a blessing and a curse. It is a blessing for those seeking support for expansive theories of individual rights. Indeed, it is hard to conceive of a theory of individual liberty that cannot find at least rhetorical support in the Ninth Amendment's declaration of retained rights. It is not surprising, therefore, to find the Ninth Amendment invoked in support of everything from Dial-a-Porn to prostitution to organ selling. Once one decides that the Ninth Amendment refers to "other" unnamed individual liberties, there is literally no textual reason to exclude any …


The Inescapable Federalism Of The Ninth Amendment, Kurt T. Lash Jan 2008

The Inescapable Federalism Of The Ninth Amendment, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

Over the past two decades, the most influential work on the Ninth Amendment has been that of libertarian scholar Randy Barnett. Over a series of articles and books, Barnett has presented the Ninth as a provision originally intended to preserve individual natural rights. Recently uncovered historical evidence, however, suggests that the Ninth originally limited federal power in order to preserve the right to local self-government. I presented this evidence in two articles published by the Texas Law Review, the first dealing with the original meaning of the Ninth Amendment, and the second dealing with a heretofore lost jurisprudence of the …


Originalism, Popular Sovereignty And Reverse Stare Decisis, Kurt T. Lash Jan 2007

Originalism, Popular Sovereignty And Reverse Stare Decisis, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

Although all interpretive methods must grapple with the issue of stare decisis, the issue is particularly acute for originalists due to the potentially radical discontinuity between original meaning and modern doctrine. An unmediated enforcement of original understanding of the Constitution would likely reverse countless precedents and impose unacceptably high costs in terms of the rule of law. On the other hand, upholding a precedent despite its variance with the original understanding undermines the very legitimacy of legal review according to most theories of originalism. Focusing on the most common normative basis for originalism, popular sovereignty, the article identifies those cases …


Minority Report: John Marshall And The Defense Of The Alien And Sedition Acts, Kurt T. Lash Jan 2007

Minority Report: John Marshall And The Defense Of The Alien And Sedition Acts, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

In 1799, the Federalist minority of the Virginia House of Delegates produced an extended defense of the Alien and Sedition Acts. This Minority Report responded to Madison's famous Virginia Resolutions and efforts by Virginia Republicans to tar the Adams Administration with having exceeded its powers under the federal Constitution. Originally attributed to John Marshall by biographer Albert Beveridge, recent biographies of Marshall have omitted the episode or rejected Beveridge's claim. The current editors of the Papers of John Marshall omitted the Minority Report from their multi-volume collection of Marshall's work and have successfully lobbied editors of similar collections to remove …


James Madison’S Celebrated Report Of 1800: The Transformation Of The Tenth Amendment, Kurt T. Lash Jan 2006

James Madison’S Celebrated Report Of 1800: The Transformation Of The Tenth Amendment, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

It has become commonplace to describe the Rehnquist Court as having staged a "Federalism Revolution." Although the current status of the Revolution is in dispute, historical treatment of the Supreme Court's jurisprudence under Chief Justice Rehnquist no doubt will emphasize a resurgence of federalism and limited construction of federal power. Cases like Gregory v. Ashcroft, New York v. United States, United States v. Lopez, Printz v. United States, Alden v. Maine, and United States v. Morrison all share a common rule of interpretation: Narrow construction of federal power to interfere with matters believed best left under state control. The textual …


Tucker’S Rule: St. George Tucker And The Limited Construction Of Federal Power, Kurt T. Lash Jan 2006

Tucker’S Rule: St. George Tucker And The Limited Construction Of Federal Power, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

When Joseph Story published his Commentaries on the Constitution in 1833, he dedicated the work "To the Honorable John Marshall," whose "expositions of constitutional law enjoy a rare and extraordinary authority. They constitute a monument of fame far beyond the ordinary memorials of political and military glory." Throughout the Commentaries, Story generously quoted Chief Justice Marshall's great nationalist opinions in McCulloch v. Maryland, Gibbons v. Ogden, and Cohens v. Virginia and used them to construct a thoroughly nationalist reading of the federal Constitution. Along the way, Story seemingly dismantled prior states' rights interpretations of federal power, particularly St. George Tucker's …


The Lost Jurisprudence Of The Ninth Amendment, Kurt T. Lash Jan 2005

The Lost Jurisprudence Of The Ninth Amendment, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

It is widely assumed that the Ninth Amendment languished in constitutional obscurity until it was resurrected in Griswold v. Connecticut by Justice Arthur Goldberg. In fact, the Ninth Amendment played a significant role in some of the most important constitutional disputes in our nation's history, including the scope of exclusive versus concurrent federal power, the authority of the federal government to regulate slavery, the constitutionality of the New Deal, and the legitimacy and scope of incorporation of the Bill of Rights into the Fourteenth Amendment. The second of two articles addressing the Lost History of the Ninth Amendment, The Lost …


The Lost Original Meaning Of The Ninth Amendment, Kurt T. Lash Jan 2004

The Lost Original Meaning Of The Ninth Amendment, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

This article presents previously unrecognized evidence regarding the original meaning of the Ninth Amendment. Obscured by the contemporary assumption that the Ninth Amendment is about rights while the Tenth Amendment is about powers, the historical roots of the Ninth Amendment can be found in the state ratification convention demands for a constitutional amendment prohibiting the constructive enlargement of federal power. James Madison's initial draft of the Ninth Amendment expressly adopted the language suggested by the state conventions and he insisted the final draft expressed the same rule of construction desired by the states. In an episode previously unnoticed by scholars, …


Two Movements Of A Constitutional Symphony: Akhil Amar’S The Bill Of Rights, Kurt T. Lash Jan 1999

Two Movements Of A Constitutional Symphony: Akhil Amar’S The Bill Of Rights, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

A remarkable effort is afoot to justify American constitutional law at the end of the twentieth century. Ground zero in this effort is Yale Law School, and the principle architects are professors Akhil Reed Amar and Bruce Ackerman. Together, these scholars are calling for a reevaluation of commonly accepted doctrines with the goal of grounding judicial review and constitutional interpretation on the principles of popular sovereignty. What makes the effort remarkable is its emphasis on political morality, as opposed to the attainment of a particular doctrinal end. Take, for example, Amar's explanation of his purpose in writing The Bill of …