Institutional Settlement, Determination, and “Mere Natural Law”
In reviewing “Mere Natural Law,” scholar Jordan Perkins argues that it is necessary that legal cognition be infused with moral reasoning.
positivism
The Declaration’s Substantive Global Appeal
The Declaration of Independence’s unique appeal globally cannot be explained by its formal aspects only
A Jurisprudential Red Pill: Part II
Evelyn Blacklock continues her commentary on Vermeule’s Common Good Constitutionalism, showing the strengths of the argument, while also demonstrating some needed nuances between the Classical and the Enlightenment perspectives of law.
Once More Unto the Breach: Arkes v. Whelan on the Overruling of Roe
In a response to Ed Whelan’s critique of “On Overturning Roe,” Prof. Arkes insists that the moral argument against Roe is the only logical one for judges who believe in the deep wrong of abortion. The pro-life cause rests on objective moral truths, not on value judgments, and as a result does not require judges (as Whelan claims) “to read their own moral convictions into the Constitution.”
In Defense of Common Good Originalism
Contributing Editor Josh Hammer defends against criticism of his Common-Good Originalism essay, arguing that ambiguities in the text’s meaning require us to give precedence to substantive ideals in interpretation.
PODCAST: Jesse Merriam and Josh Hammer on “An Even Better Originalism?”
Patrick Henry College Associate Professor Jesse Merriam and JWI affiliated scholar Josh Hammer joined JWI Deputy Director Garrett Snedeker to discuss Professor Merriam’s article, “A Better Legal Conservatism,” published in The American Mind. Prof. Merriam’s article was in response to “A Better Originalism,” co-authored by Prof. Hadley Arkes, Garrett Snedeker, Josh Hammer, and Matthew Peterson. …
