Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Reed Dickerson’S Originalism — What It Contributes To Contemporary Constitutional Debate, Thomas B. Mcaffee
Reed Dickerson’S Originalism — What It Contributes To Contemporary Constitutional Debate, Thomas B. Mcaffee
Scholarly Works
In this article the author offers his personal gratitude for the work of Reed Dickerson, along with some thoughts on his important contributions to our understanding of the interpretive process. As a young scholar in need of help in grappling with the continuing debate over constitutional interpretation, the author turned, at the suggestion of colleagues, to Reed Dickerson’s impressive book on statutory interpretation. The hours spent attempting to ingest Reed’s thoughtful work were amply rewarded, and the author took the occasion of publishing an article on the original intent debate to refer in an initial footnote to his intellectual debt …
Prolegomena To A Meaningful Debate Of The “Unwritten Constitution” Thesis, Thomas B. Mcaffee
Prolegomena To A Meaningful Debate Of The “Unwritten Constitution” Thesis, Thomas B. Mcaffee
Scholarly Works
Seventeen years ago Professor Grey launched the modern debate over the idea of an unwritten Constitution by suggesting that the key to defending modern fundamental rights decision-making might be to rediscover the founding generation's commitment to natural law and unwritten sources of basic rights. Some modern Supreme Court decisions, Grey suggested, might be better justified by reliance upon the methodology suggested by Justice Chase's famous opinion in Calder v. Bull than by looking to the justification for judicial review offered by Chief Justice Marshall in Marbury v. Madison. Grey's arguments for the unwritten Constitution idea has struck a chord …
The Bill Of Rights, Social Contract Theory, And The Rights “Retained” By The People, Thomas B. Mcaffee
The Bill Of Rights, Social Contract Theory, And The Rights “Retained” By The People, Thomas B. Mcaffee
Scholarly Works
The Ninth Amendment provides that “[t]he enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” There is no question that this Amendment was designed as a savings clause, to ensure that the specification of particular rights would not raise an inference that the Bill of Rights exhausted the rights which the people held as against the newly-created national government. But there is an ongoing debate as to nature of these additional rights retained by the people and as to the sort of claim they might support against the exercise …