The abstract meaning fallacy

University of Illinois Law Review

Volumn 2012, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 737-782

  McGinnis, John O ^a   Rappaport, Michael B ^b  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84867126943     PISSN: 02769948     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (95)

1. Richard A. Posner, Past-Dependency, Pragmatism, and Critique of History in Adjudication and Legal Scholarship
2. 67 U. Chi. L. Rev. 573,582 (2000)
3. Jack M. Balkin, Living Originalism 3 (2011).
4. Thomas B. Colby, The Sacrifice of the New Originalism, 99 GEO. L.J. 713 (2011)
5. James E. Ryan, Laying Claim to the Constitution: The Promise of New Textualism, 97 Va. L. Rev. 1523 (2011)
6. Peter J. Smith, How Different Are Originalism and Non-Originalism?, 62 HASTINGS L.J. 707 (2011)
7. Keith E. Whittington, Dworkin's "Originalism": The Role of Intentions in Constitutional Interpretation, 62 REV. POL. 197,197 (2000).
8. Ronald Dworkin,Taking Rights Seriously 135-36 (1977).
9. Ronald Dworkin, Comment, in A MATTER OF INTERPRETATION: FEDERAL COURTS AND THE LAW 115,116 (Amy Gutmann ed., 1997).
10. Ronald Dworkin, Law's Empire 361-63 (1986).
11. Ronald Dworkin, A Matter of Principle 49 (1985).
12. United States." U.S. Const, amend. XIV, § 1.
13. Michael W. McConnell, The Right to Die and the Jurisprudence of Tradition, 1997 UTAH L. REV. 665.
14. Corfield v. Coryell, 6 F. Cas. 546 (C.C.E.D. Pa. 1823) (No. 3230).
15. David H. Gans, The Unitary Fourteenth Amendment, 56 EMORY L.J. 907,918 (2007).
16. John O. McGinnis & Michael B. Rappaport, Original Methods Originalism: A New Theory of Interpretation and the Case Against Construction, 103 Nw. U. L. REV. 751,761-72 (2009)
17. Kurt T. Lash, The Origins of the Privileges or Immunities Clause, Part I: "Privileges and Immunities" As an Antebellum Term of Art, 98 GEO. L.J. 1241 (2010).
18. Murray's Lessee v. Hoboken Land & Improvement Co., 59 U.S. (18 How.) 272 (1855).
19. Murray's Lessee, 59 U.S. at 277.
20. Saikrishna B. Prakash & Michael D. Ramsey, The Executive Power over Foreign Affairs, 111 Yale L.J. 231, 234-35 (2001)
21. John F. Stinneford, The Original Meaning of "Unusual": The Eighth Amendment As a Bar to Cruel Innovation, 102 Nw. U. L. Rev. 1739 (2008).
22. John O. McGinnis & Michael B. Rappaport, The Rights of Legislators and the Wrongs of Interpretation: A Further Defense of the Constitutionality of Legislative Supermajority Rules, 47 DUKE L.J. 327 (1997).
23. U.S. Const, art. 1, § 8, cl. 3.
24. Robert G. Natelson & David Kopel, Commerce in the Commerce Clause: A Response to Jack Balkin, 109 Mich. L. Rev. First IMPRESSIONS 55,56-57 (2010), http://www.michigan lawreview.org/assets/fi/109/natelsonkopel.pdf.
25. Randy E. Barnett, Jack Balkin's Interaction Theory of "Commerce," 2012 U. ILL. L. REV. 623
26. Robert G. Natelson, The Legal Meaning of "Commerce" in the Commerce Clause, 80 St. JOHN'S L. Rev. 789, 844-45
27. Kamper v. Hawkins, 3 Va. (1 Va. Cas.) 20, 88-89 (1793)
28. Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137,175 (1803).
29. James Wilson, SPEECH IN THE State House Yard (Oct. 6, 1787)
30. THE Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution: Ratification of the Constitution by the States 167,168 (Merrill Jensen ed., 1976).
31. Anthony J. Bellia, Jr. & Bradford R. Clark, The Alien Tort Statute and the Law of Nations, 78 U. CHI. L. REV. 445, 450 (2011).
32. U.S. CONST, art. I, § 8, cl. 10.
33. U.S. CONST, art. 1, § 8, cl. 11
34. U.S. Const, art. 1, § 8, cl. 18.
35. James Madison, writing as Helvidius. 1 James Madison, Helvidius, in Answer to Pacificus, on President Washington's Proclamation of Neutrality (April 22,1793)
36. OTHER Writings OF James Madison 607 (1884).
37. Randy E. Barnett, The Original Meaning of the Commerce Clause, 68 U. CHI. L. REV. 101,125-28 (2001)
38. EMBERSON Edward Proper, Colonial Immigration Laws: A Study of the Regulation of Immigration BY THE ENGLISH COLONIES IN AMERICA 88 (1900). Moreover, the first general immigration law was, in fact, not passed until 1875, under the plenary powers doctrine which has little basis in the original meaning.
39. James A.R. Nafziger, The General Admission of Aliens Under International Law, 77 Am. J. Int'l L. 804,835 n.168 (1983)
40. The Constitution may have provided the President with the traditional executive power to issue passports.
41. Saul Cornell, The People's Constitution vs. The Lawyer's Constitution: Popular Constitutionalism and the Original Debate over Originalism, 23 YALE J.L. & Human. 295 (2011).
42. Philip A. Hamburger, The Constitution's Accommodation of Social Change, 88 MICH. L. REV. 239, 287-97 (1989)
43. ALEXANDER HAMILTON, Opinion As to the Constitutionality of the Bank of the United States, in THE Works OF ALEXANDER Hamilton 104
44. Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 1,188-89 (1824).
45. Daniel A. Farber, The Story of McCulloch.- Banking on National Power, 20 Const. Comment. 679,710 (2003-2004).
46. James Wilson, Comparison of the Constitution of the United States with That of Great Britain, reprinted in 1 The Works of James Wilson 309,329-30 (Robert Green McCloskey ed., 1967)
47. The Federalist No. 37, at 225
48. "Brutus" XI, The Supreme Court: They Will Mould the Government into Almost Any Shape They Please, N.Y. J., Jan. 31,1788
49. 2 The Debate ON THE CONSTITUTION: FEDERALIST AND ANTIFEDERALIST SPEECHES, ARTICLES, AND LETTERS DURING THE STRUGGLE OVER Ratification 129,131 (Bernard Bailyn ed., 1993).
50. ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THE American Constitution 1512,1513 (Leonard W. Levy et al. eds., 1986).
51. M'Culloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316,415-16 (1819).
52. Howard Gillman, The Collapse of Constitutional Originalism and the Rise of the Notion of the "Living Constitution" in the Course of American State-Building, 11 STUD. AM. POL. Dev. 191, 205 (1997).
53. Cong. Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess. 370 (1871)
54. Nelson Lund & John O. McGinnis, Lawrence v. Texas and Judicial Hubris, 102 MICH. L. Rev. 1555,1599-1603 (2004)
55. New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann, 285 U.S. 262,311 (1932) (Brandeis, J., dissenting).
56. U. S. Const, art. V.
57. Pollock v. Fanners' Loan & Trust Co., 157 U.S. 429 (1895)
58. U.S. CONST, amend. XVI.
59. U.S. Const, amend. XIX.
60. Michael B. Rappaport, Reconciling Textualism and Federalism: The Proper Textual Basis of the Supreme Court's Tenth and Eleventh Amendment Decisions, 93 Nw. U. L. REV. 819, 830-68, 874 (1999).
61. John Hart Ely, Democracy and Distrust7-8 (1980).
62. Jon Elster, Ulysses and the Sirens: Studies in Rationality and Irrationality (1979).
63. J. Gregory Sidak, To Declare War, 41 DUKE L.J. 27, 65-67 (1991)
64. John O. McGinnis & Ilya Somin, Federalism vs. States' Rights: A Defense of Judicial Review in a Federal System, 99 Nw. U. L. Rev. 89,107-08,121 (2004)
65. New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992).
66. Jack M. Balkin, Framework Originalism and the Living Constitution, 103 Nw. U. L. REV. 549,555 (2009).
67. Home Bldg. & Loan Ass'n v. Blaisdell, 290 U.S. 398 (1934).
68. District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008).
69. Blaisdell, 290 U.S. at 443-44,447.
70. Douglas W. Kmiec & John O. McGinnis, The Contract Clause: A Return to the Original Understanding, 14 HASTINGS CONST. L.Q. 525 (1987).
71. United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)
72. James Monroe, Observations on the Constitution (May 25,1788), available at http://teaching americanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=1799.
73. Donald E. Lively, Foreshadows of the Law: Supreme Court Dissents and Constitutional Development xv (1992).
74. Kurt T. Lash, The Lost Original Meaning of the Ninth Amendment, 83 TEX. L. REV. 331, 351 (2004).
75. Bret Boyce, Heller, McDonald and Originalism, 2010 CARDOZO L. REV. DE Novo 2 (noting the Fourteenth Amendment was passed against concern that southern states would deny rights to newly freed slaves).
76. Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537,550-51 (1896).
77. John Harrison, Reconstructing the Privileges or Immunities Clause, 101 Yale L.J. 1385, 1458 (1992).
78. AKHIL REED AMAR, THE BILL OF RIGHTS: CREATION AND RECONSTRUCTION 162 (1998) (understanding the Fourteenth Amendment as an attempt to prevent restoration of racial caste).
79. Edward L. Rubin, Passing Through the Door: Social Movement Literature and Legal Scholarship, 150 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1, 66-67 (2001)
80. Michael Coblenz, Not for Entertainment Only: Fair Use and Fiction as Social Commentary, 16 UCLA ENT. L. Rev. 265, 313-14 (2009).
81. Richard A. Epstein, The Monopolistic Vices of Progressive Constitutionalism, 2004-2005 Cato Sup. Ct. Rev. 11,32-33.
82. WILLIAM A. KLEIN & JOHN C. COFFEE, JR., BUSINESS Organization and Finance: Legal and Economic Principles 24546 (9th ed. 2004). Balkin has provided no reason to believe they would feel otherwise in political investments, like a constitution.
83. Lawrence J. White, The S&L Debacle, 59 FORDHAM L. REV. S57, S60 (1991).
84. Mark Tushnet, The Warren Court As History: An Interpretation, in THE WARREN COURT IN HISTORICAL AND POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE 1, 17 (Mark Tushnet ed., 1993)
85. Suzanne Sangree, Title IX and the Contact Sports Exemption: Gender Stereotypes in a Civil Rights Statute, 32 CONN. L. REV. 381,412 (2000).
86. Creating the Bill of Rights: The Documentary Record from the First Federal Congress 66,77-S6 (Helen E. Veit et al. eds., 1991).
87. A.E. Dick Howard, Rights in Passage: English Liberties in Early America, in THE BILL OF Rights and the States: The Colonial and Revolutionary Origins of American Liberties 3,11 (Patrick T. Conley & John P. Kaminski eds., 1992).
88. Thomas B. McAffee, Restoring the Lost World of Classical Legal Thought: The Presumption in Favor of Liberty over Law and the Court over the Constitution, 75 U. ClN. L. Rev. 1499, 1537 (2007)
89. Ogden v. Saunders, 25 U.S. (12 Wheat.) 213,354 (1827).
90. Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896).
91. John O. McGinnis & Michael B. Rappaport, Originalism and the Good Constitution, 98 Geo. L.J. 1693,1695-%, 1703-04 (2010).
92. Stephen M. Feldman, Unenumerated Rights in Different Democratic Regimes, 9 U. Pa. J. Const. L. 47,86 (2006).
93. Michael J. Klarman, Bush v. Gore Through the Lens of Constitutional History, 89 CALIF. L. Rev. 1721,1754 (2001).
94. Lawrence Baum & Neal Devins, Why the Supreme Court Cares About Elites, Not the American People, 98 GEO. L.J. 1515,1537 (2010).
95. Jack M. Balkin, Nine Perspectives on Living Originalism, 2012 U. ILL. L. REV. 815,826.