What About the Rest of the Constitution?
Amy Coney Barrett’s originalism ignores the significance of the second American Revolution.
😱 Endless Zoom Meeting 😱
A great column from
on the importance of the civil war amendments. One thing I’ll say though is that I think they are very much the basis of the left of center constitutional understanding, even if some of us don’t realize it
This is a good
piece. One problem with originalism as applied is that very few of its adherents want to take seriously the original meaning of the civil war amendments, and instead focus almost exclusively on the 1787 constitution.
Very good column. Aside from the general intellectual impoverishment of judicial "originalism" judges like Barrett simply don't want to hear about the post-Civil War amendments which fundamentally reshape the document.
William D. Adler
Another home run column from
today -- why do originalists ignore the real meaning of the Reconstruction amendments?
I strongly recommend
's essay on how conservative originalism focuses on the Constitution of 1787 although that Constitution was fundamentally changed by the Reconstruction Amendments
“The Reconstruction Constitution is a fundamentally different document than the Constitution of 1787. Yet our conversations around ‘original meaning’ rarely take account of this change.” Superb column that makes the above argument very clearly.
This column by
is really worth your time. It challenges the logic that Amy Coney Barrett lay out here by reminding us that the Constitution's meaning has evolved because the Constitution itself changed dramatically during Reconstruction.
Foner for the win
Interesting article by
. But a “right to employment” is crazy talk.
"Just as the original Constitution codified the victories (and contradictions) of the Revolution, so too did the Reconstruction Constitution do the same in relation to the Civil War."
writes, conservatives like to ignore a fair amount of amending and its significance.
Opinion | Which Constitution Is Amy Coney Barrett Talking About? - The New York Times
is a national treasure. Here he offers a devastating, historically-informed critique of originalism
I admire the way
brings historical understanding to an opinion journalism forum that seriously engages these issues.
The clearest analysis of #originalism I've read.
Alas, prob too late for Jamelle Bouie's op/ed to have the influence it should.