𝐉𝐚𝐲 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 ⚓️
@Jay__Cost
Followers
33K
Following
18K
Media
6
Statuses
75
Gerald R. Ford Nonresident Senior Fellow, @AEI. Writing a book on the Jeffersonian Republicans for @Kansas_Press. Anglican. Classical republican. ⚓️
Pittsburgh, PA
Joined April 2012
@LawLiberty This is what's interesting to me about originalism as a philosophy for SCOTUS as our de facto lawgiver: If you told the MA VA and NY ratifying conventions in 1788 that the Supreme Court was going to wield this much power, would they have ratified????
0
0
4
@LawLiberty This description is like catnip for me: "The Constitution of Conflict demonstrates that much of the problem comes from attempts to find legal answers to political problems. Challenging long-held assumptions about the Constitution, Thomas Rives Bell boldly argues that a
2
0
6
Anyhoo, there's a book coming out on this subject in November. "The Constitution of Conflict: How the Supreme Court Undermines the Separation of Powers," by Thomas Bell I'm really looking forward to reading it and I'm reviewing it for @LawLiberty. https://t.co/AD4nVeDznA
kansaspress.ku.edu
A bold and timely proposal for rethinking the role of the Supreme Court in the separation of powers.There is a widespread sense today that the separation-of-...
1
0
5
How do you police the boundaries of a document that is admittedly vague in its wording? You give every governing institution power to enforce its prerogatives. Judicial review ... at least when it morphs into judicial supremacy ... can be tough to reconcile with this.
1
0
5
This is where the context of Federalist 51 is important. Madisonian checks and balances are read as a way to resolve picayune political conflicts. And they are! But 51 is the culmination of a miniseries of essays about resolving constitutional disputes.
@Jay__Cost The fundamental purpose of orginalism to establish a solid baseline of law to create a consistency in rulings is good. But too much of the Constitution (especially the Bill of Rights) is too indefinite to do that.
2
3
17
@Jay__Cost The fundamental purpose of orginalism to establish a solid baseline of law to create a consistency in rulings is good. But too much of the Constitution (especially the Bill of Rights) is too indefinite to do that.
0
1
1
The bigger issue as far as I'm concerned is the outsized role of the judiciary in our public decisions about the proper scope of government power. That cuts against both contemporary positions.
1
1
6
There are legitimate tradeoffs between originalism and living constitutionalism, but let's dispense with the idea that either is all that radical or novel.
2
2
11
(Lots of people today would take JM's view as a "threat" to the Constitution.)
1
0
9
JM opposed the Bank of the US in 1792 because he thought that was not the original meaning as understood by the ratifying conventions. He approved the Second Bank in 1815 because he believed a vast public debate had legitimized it, but he rejected federal funding of internal
1
0
16
Guys, James Madison was an originalist.
The Constitution has not been meaningfully amended since 1971. That same year, a new method of constitutional interpretation was put forward. This would become known as originalism. Jill Lepore on how the radical philosophy has undermined the Constitution: https://t.co/pMDIS0huCX
5
25
110
I put this episode together in response to those cheering Charlie Kirk's assassination. Either these people haven't thought through what is required of a citizen in a liberal republic, or they no longer wish to live in such a republic anymore. https://t.co/R0fTQxbDFc
2
2
15
I put this episode together in response to those cheering Charlie Kirk's assassination. Either these people haven't thought through what is required of a citizen in a liberal republic, or they no longer wish to live in such a republic anymore. https://t.co/R0fTQxbDFc
2
2
15
Starting now. "Why Free Speech is ESSENTIAL To a Republic." https://t.co/AZQHYLJqMy
0
2
4
In ten minutes, the latest American Founding Podcast. "Why Free Speech is ESSENTIAL To a Republic." https://t.co/AZQHYLJqMy
0
1
7
In one hour, the latest American Founding Podcast. "Why Free Speech is ESSENTIAL To a Republic."
1
1
11
Tonight at 7 PM, here on Twitter/X. If we cannot tolerate speech we disagree with, then our experiment in self government has failed. "Why Free Speech is ESSENTIAL To a Republic."
0
1
12
Has there been a political assassination in the last fifty years against anybody who was not a public officeholder? I'm struggling to think of one.
21
4
29
I don't expect to persuade the shocking number of people who don't believe in free speech anymore. But if you still hold fast to the Declaration and the Constitution, maybe you'll find tonight's podcast interesting.
I had planned to bring The American Founding back after a summer hiatus tonight with a look at Thomas Jefferson. But given events, tonight's episode I'm mixing it up. "Why Free Speech is ESSENTIAL To a Republic." Tonight at 7 PM here on Twitter/X.
0
0
17