Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2012
Abstract
This Article seeks to situate the constitutional culture's heavy reliance on the Convention debates within an academic environment that is generally hostile to original intent arguments. The Article argues that intentionalist-friendly sources like the Convention records and The Federalist remain important not because they supply evidence of original meaning but rather because the practice of advancing historical arguments is best understood as a rhetorical exercise that derives persuasive authority from the heroic character of the Founding generation. This exercise fits within a long tradition of originalist argument and need not be abandoned in the quest for a more perfect originalism.
Disciplines
Constitutional Law | Law | Legal History
Recommended Citation
Jamal Greene,
The Case for Original Intent,
80
Geo. Wash. L. Rev.
1683
(2012).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/1749