Originalism and James Bradley Thayer

Steven G. Calabresi

Journal: Northwestern University Law Review

Volume: 113

First Page: 1419

Year: 2019

Bluebook Citation: 113 NW. U. L. REV. 1419 (2019)

Author: Steven Gow Calabresi: all 44 publications


Abstract

This Essay provides an originalist appraisal of Professor James Bradley Thayer’s famous book on The Origin and Scope of the American Doctrine of Constitutional Law. I critique Professor Thayer’s thesis on multiple levels, pointing out important aspects of the original understanding that the Framers would have had of the meaning and origins of the U.S. Constitution, as well as disputing Professor Thayer’s discussion of the history of American judicial review from 1790 to the publication of his book in 1893. I conclude that no person can be both an originalist and a Thayerian. The two theories contradict one another and cannot be jointly adhered to.

I then explain why I prefer originalism to Thayerianism as a normative matter.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.