Suchergebnisse

This article examines the use of originalist citations by Supreme Court justices in First Amendment freedom of expression opinions. It quantitatively examines when justices use originalist citations and qualitatively explores the content of the justices' citations to determine how the justices are describing the original meaning of the First Amendment. The article concludes that justices uncritically relied on the citations as authoritative; that although it is identified with conservatism and judicial constraint, originalism was frequently used by liberal justices to expand constitutional protections; and that the "blank slate" of originalism makes it a useful tool for originalists and non-originalists alike.

Silver explores how judges identified the main legal issues in federal cases dealing with national security through the mode of legal analysis they used to reach or justify their conclusions. He explains how national security/transparency cases are as much about separation of powers issues as they are about balancing transparency with national security. In addition, although legal precedent remains important, judges have other, less traditional tools at their disposal. Finally, Silver concludes that the ability to selectively choose which legal issue to focus on and rely on some modes of legal