Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 14 of 14
Full-Text Articles in Law
Toleration And The Constitution, Judith L. Hudson
Toleration And The Constitution, Judith L. Hudson
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Toleration and the Constitution by David A.J. Richards
The Rise Of Modern Judicial Review: From Constitutional Interpretation To Judge-Made Law, Ward A. Greenberg
The Rise Of Modern Judicial Review: From Constitutional Interpretation To Judge-Made Law, Ward A. Greenberg
Michigan Law Review
A Review of The Rise of Modern Judicial Review: From Constitutional Interpretation to Judge-Made Law by Christopher Wolfe
Why The Reagan Administration Resists Radical Transformation Of The Constitution, Gary C. Leedes
Why The Reagan Administration Resists Radical Transformation Of The Constitution, Gary C. Leedes
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
Judicial Conscience And Natural Rights: A Reply To Professor Jaffa, Bruce Ledewitz
Judicial Conscience And Natural Rights: A Reply To Professor Jaffa, Bruce Ledewitz
Seattle University Law Review
This Article replies to Professor Harry V. Jaffa’s article “What Were the ‘Original Intentions’ of the Framers of the Constitution of the United States?” The Article focuses on the gap the author argues Professor Jaffa left between the consciousness of the Framers and the practice of judicial review today. The author argues that the understanding that Professor Jaffa brings to the intent of the Framers is one that opens up the Constitution to the call of justice, but the author critiques the utility of Professor Jaffa’s work in resolving the contentious constitutional issues of today, including abortion and capital punishment.
Foreword: On Jaffa, Lincoln, Marshall, And Original Intent, Lewis E. Lehrman
Foreword: On Jaffa, Lincoln, Marshall, And Original Intent, Lewis E. Lehrman
Seattle University Law Review
This Foreword introduces the article to follow written by Harry V. Jaffa, scholar of Abraham Lincoln’s political philosophy. The Foreward provides background material necessary to contextualize the ongoing debate surrounding constitutional interpretation emphasizing original intent addressed in Jaffa's article.
Professor Harry V. Jaffa Divides The House: A Respectful Protest And A Defense Brief, Robert L. Stone
Professor Harry V. Jaffa Divides The House: A Respectful Protest And A Defense Brief, Robert L. Stone
Seattle University Law Review
This Article replies to Professor’ Jaffa’s article, “What Were the ‘Original Intentions’ of the Framers of the Constitution of the United States?,” and book, The Crisis of the House Divided. The Article argues that Professor Jaffa’s method throughout his indictment of legal scholars has three flaws. First, the Article argues that Professor Jaffa takes statements of sensible political compromises-such as support for judicial restraint, British traditions, and local self-government-and treats them as if they were philosophical statements. Second, the author contends that Professor Jaffa assembles a composite indictment, which in law is appropriately applied only to an indictment against …
What Were The "Original Intentions" Of The Framers Of The Constitution Of The United States?, Harry V. Jaffa
What Were The "Original Intentions" Of The Framers Of The Constitution Of The United States?, Harry V. Jaffa
Seattle University Law Review
This Article explains how the doctrine of original intent might be defended as the basis for interpreting the Constitution. The deepest political differences in American history have always been differences concerning the meaning of the Constitution, whether as originally intended, or as amended. Since the Civil War, the debate has often taken the form of a dispute over whether or not the Civil War amendments, notably the fourteenth, have changed the way in which the whole Constitution, and not only the amended parts, is read or interpreted. It is not possible to even discuss how or whether the Civil War …
Seven Questions For Professor Jaffa, George Anastaplo
Seven Questions For Professor Jaffa, George Anastaplo
Seattle University Law Review
This Article poses questions inspired by the four essays collected in Professor Harry V. Jaffa’s article “What Were the ‘Original Intentions’ of the Framers of the Constitution of the United States?” The Article offers, in addition to fresh reflections upon these questions, three appendices, which bear upon various matters touched upon by Professor Jaffa. These appendices include, “The Founders of Our Founders: Jerusalem, Athens, and the American Constitution,” “The Ambiguity of Justice in Plato’s Republic,” and “Private Rights and Public Law: The Founders’ Perspective.” The Epilogue provides informed observations of a scholar who comments on the differences between Professor …
Rationalism In Constitutional Law, Robert F. Nagel
A Comment On Democratic Constitutionalism, Robert F. Nagel
A Comment On Democratic Constitutionalism, Robert F. Nagel
Publications
No abstract provided.
Fish V. Zapp: The Case Of The Relatively Autonomous Self, Pierre Schlag
Fish V. Zapp: The Case Of The Relatively Autonomous Self, Pierre Schlag
Publications
No abstract provided.
Disestablished Religion In Pennsylvania And Kentucky: A Study In Constitutional Interpretation, Kenneth S. Gallant
Disestablished Religion In Pennsylvania And Kentucky: A Study In Constitutional Interpretation, Kenneth S. Gallant
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Constructing A Constitution: 'Orginal Intention' In The Slave Cases, James Boyd White
Constructing A Constitution: 'Orginal Intention' In The Slave Cases, James Boyd White
Other Publications
The question how our Constitution is to be interpreted is a living one for us today, both in the scholarly and in the political domains. Professors argue about "interpretivism" and "originalism" in law journals, they study hermeneutics and deconstruction to determine whether or not interpretation is possible at all, and if so on what premises, and they struggle to create theories that will tell us both what we do in fact and what we ought to do. Politicians and public figures (including Attorney General Edwin Meese) talk in the newspapers and elsewhere about the authority of the "original intention of …
Constitutional Decisions And The Supreme Law, Kent Greenawalt
Constitutional Decisions And The Supreme Law, Kent Greenawalt
Faculty Scholarship
What status do Supreme Court decisions have for officials in the political branches of our government? Six months ago, Attorney General Edwin Meese III rekindled controversy over this enduring and troublesome question when he claimed in a widely reported lecture that Supreme Court decisions interpreting the Constitution are not the supreme law of the land, and are properly subject to forms of opposition by other governmental officials. The general reaction to the speech was that it was meant to reduce the perceived authority of Supreme Court opinions, and a close reading of the speech certainly leaves this impression. Yet, even …