Andrew Shankman: "What Would the Founding Fathers Make of Originalism? Not much."
Check it out
here. A taste:
Andrew Shankman is Associate Professor of History at Rutgers University-Camden. His book Original Intents: Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison, and the American Founding is being published by Oxford University Press in March 2017.
[...]
Hamilton had a top-down and
elitist conception of an open-ended and living Constitution. Statesmen
and lawmakers would draw connections between desired policies and
enumerated powers. Once a connection was plausibly established, they
could take an action not expressly permitted by the Constitution if the
Constitution did not expressly forbid it. Initially, Madison seemed to
be arguing for a fixed and rarely changing Constitution. But in 1791 and
1792, as he continued to challenge Hamilton’s policies, his
constitutional thinking evolved. He developed a bottom-up and democratic
conception of an open-ended and living Constitution.
4 comments:
bullshit from some nobody
Hamilton was no 'living constitutionalist'
https://books.google.com/books?id=BkDCIOCJE00C&pg=PT124&lpg=PT124&dq=hamilton+%22living+constitutionalism%22&source=bl&ots=AVkwoHHzEh&sig=EEJ5IJyjC2kzQvL6G91psnme14s&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi8l8_MyfPSAhVW92MKHUUqA9MQ6AEIJjAC#v=onepage&q=hamilton%20%22living%20constitutionalism%22&f=false
It's published by Oxford University Press.
that means nothing
all sorts of intellectual frauds are published by reputable academic presses
and I assure you, a degree in history does not make anyone an authority on judicial or political philosophy
and in this case, we see proof
calling Hamilton a living constitutionalist is sophomoric hackery, as the link above shows
a 20th century judicial philosophy scotch-taped onto an 18th century mind
Post a Comment