About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline



15 U. Pa. J. Const. L. Height. Scrutiny 1 (2012-2013)

handle is hein.journals/jclon15 and id is 1 raw text is: 









ORIGINALIST  IDEOLOGY   AND THE  RULE  OF LAW


                            Ian Bartrum

   In July of 1985, Attorney General Edwin  Meese  addressed  the na-
tional convention of the American   Bar Association with hopes of in-
spiring a fundamental  change  in constitutional interpretation.  He
railed against the Supreme  Court's unprincipled  turn towards  a 'ju-
risprudence  of idiosyncrasy, lamented recent decisions as more pol-
icy choices than articulations of constitutional principle, and called
urgently on the Justices to adopt a coherent jurisprudential stance,
lest a constitution in the true sense cease to exist.2 Meese had  a
particular stance in mind, and, to no one's surprise, it was not a re-
turn to the Warren   Court's brand  of radical egalitarianism.3 Ra-
ther, he claimed that the only interpretive theory adequate to protect
our democratic  institutions and the rule of law is a jurisprudence of
original intention.  Of course, most such attempts  to initiate broad
interpretive change  have  fairly limited effect, but Meese's speech
seemed  to engage an idea whose  time had come,  and, in retrospect, it
helped  bring about something  of a sea change in constitutional theo-
ry. To  wit, Justice Antonin Scalia recently reflected that, unlike cir-
cumstances  at the time of his appointment, I[o] riginalism is [now] in
the game,  even if it does not always prevail.5 And, a little over a dec-
ade after Meese's speech, Laurence  Tribe would  summarize   some  of
Ronald  Dworkin's  thoughts  with what  has become   a contemporary
ubiquity: We are all originalists now.
   While  Meese  certainly did not invent originalism, his speech un-
doubtedly  helped  revive an approach  that had fallen into some dis-


*   Associate Professor, William S. Boyd School of Law, UNLV. Many thanks to Sean Wilson,
    whose fundamental insights about language and meaning deeply inform this paper. Arty
    misunderstandings or misapplications of those insights are entirely my own.
 1  See Edwin Meese III, Speech Before the American Bar Association (July 9, 1985), reprinted
     in ORIGINALISM: A QUARTER-CENTURY OF DEBATE 47 (Steven G. Calabresi ed., 2007).
 2  Id. at 50, 52-53.
 3  Id. at 52.
 4  Id.
 5  Antonin Scalia, Foreword to ORIGINALISM: A QUARTER-CENTURY OF DEBATE 43, 44 (Steven
    G. Calabresi ed., 2007).
 6  Laurence H. Tribe, Comment, in ANTONIN SCALIA, A MATTER OF INTERPRETATION 65, 67
     (1997).


1