Originalism, Stare Decisis, and Constitutional Authority

  title={Originalism, Stare Decisis, and Constitutional Authority},
  author={Christopher J. Peters},
This chapter in the forthcoming volume "Precedent in the United States Supreme Court" (Springer 2013) examines the relationship among three normative questions about American constitutional law: How should the Constitution be interpreted? When may (or should) the Supreme Court overrule its own constitutional precedents? And why is the Constitution binding at all? The author begins by deconstructing the “special difficulty” with stare decisis that proponents of originalist interpretation often… 
1 Citations
Legal Formalism, Procedural Principles, and Judicial Constraint in American Adjudication
American proponents of legal formalism, such as Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, worry (quite reasonably) that unfettered judicial discretion poses a threat to democratic legitimacy, and they


Originalism, popular sovereignty, and reverse stare decisis
Although all theories of constitutional interpretation must confront the issue of stare decisis, the interpretive theory of originalism has generated particular attention given the potential for
Reconciling Originalism and Precedent
Originalism is often thought, by both its advocates and its critics, to be inconsistent with precedent. This Article challenges this common view of originalism and argues that nothing in the
A Critical Introduction to the Originalism Debate
Since its founding in 1982, the Federalist Society and many of its members have promoted originalism as the correct philosophy to use in interpreting the Constitution. The originalism debate is of
A Pragmatic Defense of Originalism
In this brief essay, we offer a new defense of originalism that focuses on its consequences. We argue that interpreting the Constitution according to its original meaning is more likely to produce
The Living Constitution
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia once remarked that the theory of an evolving, "living" Constitution effectively "rendered the Constitution useless." He wanted a "dead Constitution," he joked,
Originalism : a quarter-century of debate
What did the Constitution mean at the time it was adopted? How should we interpret today the words used by the Founding Fathers? In ORIGINALISM: A QUARTER-CENTURY OF DEBATE, these questions are
Trumping Precedent with Original Meaning: Not as Radical as It Sounds
In recent years, originalism as a method of interpretation has grown in its intellectual and practical appeal. The latest challenge to originalism from nonoriginalists is based on the doctrine of
Originalism and the Good Constitution
In this article we argue that originalism advances the welfare of the present day citizens of the United States, because it promotes constitutional interpretations that are likely to have better
1 Do We Have an Unwritten Constitution
The most reiterated theme of the constitutional jurisprudence was the need for fidelity to the constitutional text in judicial review. The Constitution is a written document. The courts effectuate
Heller & Originalism's Dead Hand - In Theory and in Practice
This essay considers whether and how originalism promotes the Constitution's democratic legitimacy, in theory and in practice. In the late twentieth century, critics of the Warren and Burger courts