Academic

Paulsen on Interpretive Rules in the Constitution

By Lawrence Solum

Michael Stokes Paulsen (University of St. Thomas School of Law) has posted Does the Constitution Prescribe Rules for its Own Interpretation? (Northwestern University Law Review, 2009) on SSRN.  Here is the abstract:

It is frequently assumed that the Constitution specifies no rules governing how it is to be interpreted or applied. But is this really so? This article argues that this commonly held assumption is seriously mistaken. A careful reading of the Constitution's text shows that the Constitution itself prescribes an interpretive methodology of original public meaning textualism. The Constitution sets forth these general interpretive instructions in Article VI, in language confirmed by the Enacting Clause (Preamble), the "Establishment Clause" (of Article VII), by the structure and logic of Article V, and by the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. In addition, the Constitution contains a number of specific, "retail" interpretive instructions, including the Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh Amendments.

Highly recommended.

Full post as published by Legal Theory Blog on November 19, 2008 (boomark / email).