FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3100260213> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3100260213 abstract "Judges and statesmen of the early Republic had heated exchanges over the importance of hewing to the text in constitutional interpretation, and they advanced dueling interpretive prescriptions. That is why contemporary theorists of all persuasions can find support for their positions in the Founding era. But no side of the Founders’ debate over constitutional interpretation maps perfectly onto a modern school of thought. Modern scholarship has misunderstood the terms of the Founders’ debate because it sits on an unfamiliar axis. Instead of arguing over whether the Constitution was, for instance, living or static, this Article demonstrates that early American lawyers debated whether the Constitution should be interpreted according to the methodologies applicable to public or private legislation. This distinction among different types of legislation has faded from view because modern legislatures almost never pass private laws—statutes that apply only to one person, group, or corporation. But in early America, private legislation was the majority of legislatures’ business. Generally applicable laws, like those Congress busies itself with today, were the minority. What’s more, American courts had fixed, predictable, and familiar rules of interpretation for each type of law. Private acts received stricter, more text-orientated interpretations while public acts were interpreted broadly and pragmatically to effectuate their purposes, taking into account new circumstances that the drafters may not have foreseen. After ratification, critical policy differences emerged among American statesmen in the first Congress. Hamilton and Madison, once united as authors of the Federalist Papers, found themselves on different sides. Both insisted that the Constitution must be interpreted to vindicate their views, and in the process, they opened a debate about interpretation that would characterize the nation’s constitutional jurisprudence until the 1820s. The Federal Constitution was a novelty. But lawyers don’t tend to make new rules to suit new situations; we prefer to rely on precedent. And that is what these lawyers did, using legal tools devised for interpreting legislation—a form of written law with consistent interpretive rules that were part of the bread-and-butter practice of every American lawyer. We cannot understand the major cases of the Marshall Court, including Marbury, Martin, and McCulloch without this context. In these cases, litigants argued over, and the Court wrestled with, whether public or private legislation provided the best analogy for the Federal Constitution. The answer dictated whether restrictive or pragmatic rules would govern its interpretation. The terms of these arguments would have been obvious to the legal thinkers of that generation. Yet, in spite of all the attention we have lavished on Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison, Marshall, Story, and their world, this central dynamic of their legal culture has remained unexplored. This Article argues that, during framing and ratification, many of the Founders thought the Constitution would be interpreted according to the rules applicable to public legislation, although statesmen like Jefferson and Madison later took a different view. Chief Justice Marshall’s enduring commitment to the public-act analogy explains his embrace of “implied powers” in McCulloch and underpins the broad, nationalist vision in his other major decisions. These insights are not only critical to understanding those decisions on their own terms, they are also highly relevant to modern constitutional theorists who rely on early American precedent. If the Founders intended that the Constitution would be interpreted according to the rules of public legislation, then the “original” Constitution is a flexible and pragmatic charter, not a fixed and immutable artifact." @default.
• W3100260213 created "2020-11-23" @default.
• W3100260213 creator A5085312995 @default.
• W3100260213 date "2020-10-30" @default.
• W3100260213 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W3100260213 title "Expounding the Constitution" @default.
• W3100260213 hasPublicationYear "2020" @default.
• W3100260213 type Work @default.
• W3100260213 sameAs 3100260213 @default.
• W3100260213 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W3100260213 crossrefType "posted-content" @default.
• W3100260213 hasAuthorship W3100260213A5085312995 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConcept C17319257 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConcept C2776154427 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConcept C2776453310 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConcept C2776713681 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConcept C2777351106 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConcept C2777553895 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConcept C2778061430 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConcept C527412718 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConcept C83009810 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConceptScore W3100260213C138885662 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConceptScore W3100260213C17319257 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConceptScore W3100260213C17744445 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConceptScore W3100260213C199539241 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConceptScore W3100260213C2776154427 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConceptScore W3100260213C2776453310 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConceptScore W3100260213C2776713681 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConceptScore W3100260213C2777351106 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConceptScore W3100260213C2777553895 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConceptScore W3100260213C2778061430 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConceptScore W3100260213C41895202 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConceptScore W3100260213C527412718 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConceptScore W3100260213C83009810 @default.
• W3100260213 hasConceptScore W3100260213C94625758 @default.
• W3100260213 hasLocation W31002602131 @default.
• W3100260213 hasOpenAccess W3100260213 @default.
• W3100260213 hasPrimaryLocation W31002602131 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W1497469915 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W1585932163 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W2073502037 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W2150084805 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W227210910 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W2508777656 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W251971378 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W2896405782 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W2946234010 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W3123170609 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W3123401537 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W3123910018 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W3123919679 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W3124705860 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W3125451213 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W3125714067 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W3131850209 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W3170262802 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W82914394 @default.
• W3100260213 hasRelatedWork W998700642 @default.
• W3100260213 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3100260213 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3100260213 magId "3100260213" @default.
• W3100260213 workType "article" @default.