4 ms·
There's two ways to interpret the constitution: the honest way, and the way where you pretend that not only were the Founders of one mind on what the Constituti
by FactolSarin 6y ago
There's two ways to interpret the constitution: the honest way, and the way where you pretend that not only were the Founders of one mind on what the Constitution meant, but also that you can read that mind two and a half centuries later.
- dragonwriter 6y agoSo, you are saying that textualist originalism, like Scalias, is the honest way, whereas intentionalist originalism is dishonest? (And, yeah, there's actually more than two ways to interpret the Constituion.)
- dahdum 6y agoNot the OP, but of those two, I certainly agree textualism is more "honest". I don't see how you could ever divine a singular true intent behind a compromise of hundreds of divergent minds.
- dragonwriter 6y ago"Textualism" requires divining a single true meaning as interpreted by some not-well-specified group contemporary to the writing, instead of doing so for the at least somewhat-well-specified group of people adopting the measure required for "intentionalism". (I think both forms of originalism are useful and important interpretive lenses, but I think taking either as universally decisive or even mistaking either for a decidable objective standard is deeply problematic.)