Jeffrey Bristol engages with Holden Tanner and Jesse Merriam about the role of historical originalism in state and federal structure. He argues that the federal constitution is unique from other nations in that it retains a long, public discourse and history that has matured with fundamental perception and that has been vital to both its conception and meaning.
A focus on the jurisprudence of the school prayer cases, rather than on the matter and form of the polity, avoids the central task for conservative legal scholars and advocates seeking to shape again the moral culture.
We must marry Antifederalist sympathies, which recognize the dangers of concentrating power, to a holistic conservative jurisprudence, says Holden Tanner.
Join the Anchoring Truths Podcast presented by the James Wilson Institute for a lively hour discussing conflicts in state constitutional law with Judge Jeff Sutton of the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Topics also include judicial review, administrative law, and why lawyers do not sue in state court as often as federal …
If ‘Dobbs’ is decided following the ‘neutral principles’ of constitutional interpretation, it would not mean the end of abortion, according to Gerald Bradley, or even the beginning of the end of it. ‘Dobbs’ would instead be the start of a whole new phase of the political struggle over abortion. Yet the Constitution requires more.
Continuing our symposium on school prayer, JWI Affiliated Scholar Gunnar Gundersen makes the case for a common call to prayer in American public life and in its public education.
Jesse Merriam responds to Holden Tanner and Josh Hammer on how a jurisprudence of Natural Law can be effectuated at the state court level
Prof. Arkes defends “A Better Originalism” against Judge William Pryor’s critique.
Josh Hammer responds to Holden Tanner’s piece on Conservative judging. He explains how even the Constitution itself orients our jurisprudence towards principles of natural justice.
JWI’s Founder and Director Hadley Arkes goes another round with Ed Whelan and discusses the rightful place for moral reasoning in judicial jurisprudence
