Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCarter, Stephen
dc.date2021-11-25T13:34:23.000
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-26T11:38:21Z
dc.date.available2021-11-26T11:38:21Z
dc.date.issued1992-01-01T00:00:00-08:00
dc.identifierfss_papers/2252
dc.identifier.contextkey1902328
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/1548
dc.description.abstractI shall begin with a disclaimer. I am a separation of powers scholar. I do not think of myself as a Bill of Rights scholar. I study the Constitution of 1787. My bicentennial was four years ago. This topic for me is something new. In my separation of powers jurisprudence, I often am described by those who have read my work as an originalist. I do not necessarily describe myself that way, but that label will do for the time being. I am something of an originalist, not because I believe that the Founders wanted things that way, but because, for some of the reasons that Gary Lawson and Lino Graglia have stated, and for some other reasons that I will not bother to explain just now, originalism—at least the right form of originalism—is the only methodology through which courts can solve both the problems of determinacy and justification that Gary Lawson mentions.
dc.titleOriginalism and the Bill of Rights
dc.source.journaltitleFaculty Scholarship Series
refterms.dateFOA2021-11-26T11:38:21Z
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/2252
dc.identifier.legacyfulltexthttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3239&context=fss_papers&unstamped=1


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Originalism_and_the_Bill_of_Ri ...
Size:
392.2Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record