• snooggums@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Originalism would be better named “selective originalism” because it cherry picks specific parts out of context and ignores the rest. A religion of legality.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Exactly. It’s not a legal theory, just an smokescreen right-wing judges use when their fascist agenda happens to align with some twisted quasi-historical interpretation of the law.

  • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    The funny thing is that Jefferson and other ‘Founding Fathers’ thought that change was good and the dead shouldn’t rule the living.

    • ForestOrca@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      And apparently assumed that the constitution should be re-written every 17 years or so. That’s the ‘constitutional convention’ ploy, which I’m not so sure it it’s a good idea or not, at this time. smh. we’re so fecked. wait, where’s I put my optimism… it’s around here somewhere.

      • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        MAGoo logic.

        America needs a Constitutional Convention because the world has changed as we must change with it!

        AND

        The Convention delegates shouldn’t be chosen by a direct popular vote because the Founding Fathers wanted us to live as States!

  • RestrictedAccount@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Originalism has been dead since the Liberals noticed that it was dammed useful.

    The Court now uses Historical Practice and Tradition.