John Ehrett ’21 analyzes the role Vermeule’s book plays
in calling for a return to better legal reasoning. Yet, even Vermeule’s
solution may not address the root of the problem.
Evelyn Blacklock examines Prof. Adrian Vermeule’s “Common Good Constitutionalism” and the alternative it offers to the status quo camps of jurisprudence.
In this episode, Garrett Snedeker joins Matt Peterson, President of New Founding and founder of The American Mind, to discuss the reception of “A Better Originalism,” statesmanship in American politics, and the need for new institutions.
With discussions about the common good reaching the public square, Timon Cline writes about how the common good can be determined by both judges and legislature.
James Wilson Institute Fellow Holden Tanner discusses the shortfalls of textualist originalist jurisprudence and how to recover common law jurisprudence.
In his response to David Forte’s “Originalism and Its Discontents,” Bradley Rebeiro utilizes the case study of slavery “to reconsider how we understand this tension between originalism and natural law theory to see if there remains a better way to reconcile the two.”
Eric Hageman responds to David Forte and “A Better Originalism,” warning that illegitimate lawmaking by judges is not the solution to the current problem of an overreaching judiciary.
The James Wilson Institute’s Mission is to restore to a new generation of lawyers, judges, and citizens the understanding of the American Founders about the first principles of our law and the moral grounds of their own rights.