Is Originalism Original?

About the event

Constitutional originalism conceives of itself as restoring the constitution as originally understood and ratified—but how well does originalism in fact comport with 18th-century constitutional thought?

All are invited to join Zephyr in exploring this question with Prof. Jonathan Gienapp (Stanford, History & Stanford Law School). In his recent book (Against Constitutional Originalism: A Historical Critique), Prof. Gienapp has argued that, at least in its dominant form, originalism makes three substantive assumptions about the nature of our constitution that would not have been taken for granted in the 18th century: (1) that the content of the constitution just is the content of the constitutional text; (2) that the content of the constitution cannot be changed except by the formal procedures of amendment laid out in the constitutional text; and (3) that the constitutional text is a species of legal text and should therefore be disambiguated according to the established canons of legal interpretation.

Dinner will be provided to all attendees. Please RSVP so that Zephyr can plan accordingly.

About the speaker

Jonathan Gienapp is Associate Professor of History and Associate Professor of Law. He specializes in the constitutional, political, legal, and intellectual history of the early United States. His primary focus to date has been the origins and development of the U.S. Constitution, in particular the ways in which Founding-era Americans understood and debated constitutionalism across the nation's early decades. His historical interests often intersect with modern legal debates over constitutional interpretation and theory, especially those centered on the theory of constitutional originalism. He is also especially interested in the method and practice of the history of ideas.