Philosophy Compass 4 (4):682-702 (2009)

Abstract
Constitutional interpretation is problematic because it can be difficult to distinguish legitimate interpretation from illegitimate change. The distinction depends largely on what a constitution is. A constitution, like any other law, necessarily has a meaning, which pre-exists judicial interpretation: it is not a set of meaningless marks on paper. Any plausible constitutional theory must offer an account of the nature of that meaning. In doing so, it must address two main questions. The first is whether the meaning of the constitution is given solely by its words, or also by additional evidence of underlying intentions, purposes or values. The second question is whether, in either case, its meaning is determined by the original meanings, intentions, purposes or values of the founding generation, or by contemporary meanings, intentions, purposes or values. This question divides so-called 'originalists' from 'non-originalists'. This article discusses all these alternatives, and the main arguments for and against them. It is subtitled 'Originalism' because it defends a moderate version of that position; however, it is argued that this is equivalent to a moderate version of non-originalism
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1747-9991.2009.00207.x
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 53,688
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Law's Empire.R. DWORKIN - 1986 - Harvard University Press.
Collective Intentions and Actions.John Searle - 1990 - In Philip R. Cohen Jerry Morgan & Martha Pollack (eds.), Intentions in Communication. MIT Press. pp. 401-415.
Justice in Robes.Ronald Dworkin (ed.) - 2006 - Belknap Press.
Intention and Interpretation: A Last Look.Jerrold Levinson - 1992 - In Gary Iseminger (ed.), Intention and Interpretation. Temple University Press. pp. 221--56.

View all 12 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Constitutionalism.Wil Waluchow - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-06-05

Total views
150 ( #60,636 of 2,349,559 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #510,673 of 2,349,559 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes