| Description |
-
On the modern Supreme Court, both Justices Antonin Scalia and David Souter use historical evidence to discern the original meaning of the religion clauses of the Constitution. Yet despite this common citing of history, both justices consistently reach opposite conclusions, conservative and liberal respectively, on the outcomes of religion clause cases. This Thesis examines the originalist approach ... read moreof both justices and determines what accounts for their differences. While Scalia relies on text and tradition to discover original meaning, Souter looks to more theoretical evidence from the Founders with a broader scope of evidence. This Thesis argues that while Scalia sets a high standard of originalist analysis for himself, Souter's more detailed approach most fully comports with Scalia's theoretical understanding of what originalism entails.read less
|
|---|
This object is in collection
