Bibliograph

Worse than nothing, the dangerous fallacy of originalism, Erwin Chemerinsky

Type

Label

Worse than nothing, the dangerous fallacy of originalism, Erwin Chemerinsky

Language

eng

Bibliography note

Includes bibliographical references and index

Index

index present

Literary Form

non fiction

Main title

Worse than nothing

Nature of contents

bibliography

Oclc number

1310154267

Responsibility statement

Erwin Chemerinsky

Sub title

the dangerous fallacy of originalism

Summary

Originalism, the view that the meaning of a constitutional provision is fixed when it is adopted, was once the fringe theory of a few extremely conservative legal scholars but is now a well-accepted mode of constitutional interpretation. Three of the Supreme Court's nine justices explicitly embrace the originalist approach, as do increasing numbers of judges in the lower courts.00Noted legal scholar Erwin Chemerinsky gives a comprehensive analysis of the problems that make originalism unworkable as a method of constitutional interpretation. He argues that the framers themselves never intended constitutional interpretation to be an inflexible and shows how it is often impossible to know what the "original intent" of any particular provision was. Perhaps worst of all, though its supporters tout it as a politically neutral and objective method, originalist interpretation tends to disappear when its results fail to conform to modern conservative ideology

Classification