Подтвердите e-mail

Для публикаций, комментариев, реакций и сообщений подтвердите адрес.

Публикация

Предыдущая публикация

From an outsiders perspective, I see Hamburger seeking authority in past meaning in precisely the ways that I find so unappealing about originalism. To the extent that he's open to making presentist policy arguments, I prefer that!

100

I'd also add that it seems to me (again as an outsider) that the litigation of what is "true" originalism is part of the insider's game of originalism. I assume that Wurman and Lash are "true" originalists while Hamburger is not? Or are they no longer "true" if they persist in being wrong?

Обсуждение

Ответы

My broader point is that originalism and its boundaries are the inventions of originalists. Which makes originalism very difficult to critique from the outside. It is both totalizing (in the sense that we're "all originalists now") and exclusionary (only some of us are originalists).

Ответ для Dan Farbman

This is different from lots of other fields of study! I've never heard a local gov person insist that someone talking about local gov is "not really doing local gov." That sentence doesn't even make sense!

Ответ для Dan Farbman

Originalism is whole-cloth nonsense. We shouldn’t have to regard it with even a sliver of seriousness.

Respectfully, this isn’t a game to me and I’d as soon ditch the term in these discussions. it’s important for me to delegitimate bad arguments by critiquing them and denying them labels that carry normative weight with powerful people. I’m not in this for conceptual integrity or turf defense.

Ответ для Evan Bernick, a finite mode with a smol hooman and a lorg floof

you’re free to call whatever you like originalism, just as you‘re free to call astrology science. I’ll respond that I can tell the difference and try to explain why I see things that way if I think it is true and if I think it matters. And if you’d prefer I’m glad to stipulate that it is originalism

Ответ для Evan Bernick, a finite mode with a smol hooman and a lorg floof

I think this strategic choice to police the boundaries of originalism to seek to deny legitimacy is defensible. I'm a pluralist about strategy in a complex and fallen world. But, game or not, I'm observing a) that there are rules, and b) that those rules are maintained by insiders FOR insiders.