Constitutional Interpretation
Textual Meaning, Original Intent, and
Judicial Review
Keith E. Whittington
New in paperback: September 2001
xvi, 300 pages, 6-1/8 x 9-1/4
Paper ISBN 978-0-7006-1141-6, $19.95
Constitutional scholarship has
deteriorated into a set of armed camps, with defenders of different
theories of judicial review too often talking to their own supporters
but not engaging their opponents. This book breaks free of the
stalemate and reinvigorates the debate over how the judiciary
should interpret the Constitution.
Keith Whittington reconsiders the implications of the fundamental
legal commitment to faithfully interpret our written Constitution.
Making use of arguments drawn from American history, political
philosophy, and literary theory, he examines what it means to
interpret a written constitution and how the courts should go
about that task. He concludes that when interpreting the Constitution,
the judiciary should adhere to the discoverable intentions of
the Founders.
Other originalists have also asserted that their approach
is required by the Constitution but have neither defended that
claim nor effectively responded to critics of their assumptions
or their method. This book sympathetically examines the most
sophisticated critiques of originalism based on postmodern, hermeneutic,
and literary theory, as well as the most common legal arguments
against originalists. Whittington explores these criticisms,
their potential threat to originalism, and how originalist theory
might be reconstructed to address their concerns. In a nondogmatic
and readily understandable way, he explains how originalist methods
can be reconciled with an appropriate understanding of legal
interpretation and why originalism has much to teach all constitutional
theorists. He also shows how originalism helps realize the democratic
promise of the Constitution without relying on assumptions of
judicial restraint.
This book carefully examines both the possibilities and the
limitations of constitutional interpretation and judicial review.
It shows us not only what the judiciary ought to do, but what
the limits of appropriate judicial review are and how judicial
review fits into a larger system of constitutional government.
With its detailed and wide-ranging explorations in history, philosophy,
and law, this book is essential reading for anyone interested
in how the Constitution ought to be interpreted and what it means
to live under a constitutional government.
"Offers one of the best and most sophisticated arguments
for originalism ever presented."--Review of Politics
"Highly recommended for anyone interested in the foundations
of American government and the judiciary."--Library
Journal
"For those fascinated by the intricacies of contemporary
legal theory, this book should prove nearly indispensable."--Perspectives
on Political Science
"A remarkable achievement. . . . One of the most sophisticated
and powerful defenses of original jurisprudence I have read."--Rogers
M. Smith, author of Civic Ideals and Liberalism
and American Constitutional Law
"A masterful job. I have never seen a book that better
melds political theory, constitutional theory, and the Founding
period. Whittington's work is so well argued and detailed that
all serious scholars (including originalists and non-originalists)
will have to pay attention to it. This will be an award winner."--Ronald
Kahn, author of The Supreme Court and Constitutional Theory,
1953-1993
"A timely, important, meticulously researched, and well-written
book that makes a valuable contribution to constitutional theory
and is the best work on constitutional interpretation that I
have read. It deserves attention from a wide audience."--Robert
Lowry Clinton, author of God and Man in the Law
KEITH E. WHITTINGTON is assistant professor in the
department of politics at Princeton University and the author
of Constitutional Construction: Divided Powers and Constitutional
Meaning.
|