« SCOTUSblog on Originalist Amicus Briefs
Michael Ramsey
| Main | More on the Space Force and the Constitution
Michael Ramsey »

08/25/2018

Brian Kogelmann & Alexander William Salter: Rawlsian Originalism
Michael Ramsey

Brian Kogelmann (University of Arizona - Department of Philosophy) and Alexander William Salter (Texas Tech University - Rawls College of Business; American Institute for Economic Research) have posted Rawlsian Originalism on SSRN.  Here is the abstract:

How should judges reason in a well-ordered constitutional democracy? John Rawls answered they ought to do so in accordance with public reason. We show this requirement is correct but inadequate. It permits too many disparate principles of constitutional interpretation. Intriguingly, Rawls himself suggests another criterion: any principle of constitutional interpretation must forestall the political stakes problem – the tendency for ordinary politics to become do-or-die affairs when de facto constitutional amendment can follow from majoritarian control. We consider two opposed interpretive principles, Originalism and Living Constitutionalism, which are both consistent with public reason. But only the former solves the political stakes problem. Originalism does this by striking down constitutional revisions that do not proceed according to de jure procedures. In contrast, Living Constitutionalism merely relocates the political stakes problem to whatever arena determines the selection of judges. We thus conclude, on Rawlsian grounds, that judges should be Originalists.

(Thanks to Laurence Claus for the pointer).