Bad originalism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It has been suggested that this article or section be merged with Originalism. (Discuss)

This article or section includes a list of references or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks in-text citations.
You can improve this article by introducing more precise citations.

Bad originalism refers to one or another kind of corruption of Originalism, and may well be a form of judicial activism.

Bad originalism can occur if:

A legitimate originalist inquiry reaches flawed conclusions (e.g. evidence that would have been vital was unknown at the time)
An originalist inquiry is manipulated to reach preferred results (e.g. evidence that would have been vital was available but was ignored)

However, note that Originalism is a theory of interpretation, not of construction. Two originalists can examine the same materials and come out on different sides of the case (see, e.g. Granholm v. Heald; McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm'n), without either of them having slipped into bad originalism. Even once the original meaning (or, alternatively, the original intent) has been discerned, there remains the question of how broad or narrow a construction is placed upon that meaning. That having been said, while this is not per se bad originalism, it can become bad originalism once more if, having determined the original meaning / understanding / intent, a construction is placed upon that meaning which the text simply will not withstand.

Advocates of the compact theory maintain that the nationalist cohorts of Daniel Webster malign historical fact concerning the intentions of the founding fathers to obfuscate the nature of the Constitution, to suit their dialectic which aggrandizes increasingly centralized power around the federal head.^{[verification needed]}

The term "bad originalism" was probably coined by Prof. Jack Balkin.