Taking Framers Seriously: The Originalism and its Impact in the Constitutional Interpretation
Los framers en serio: el originalismo y su impacto en la interpretación constitucional
Article Sidebar
PDF (Español (España))
FLIP
XML (Español (España))
HTML (Español (España))
Main Article Content
Abstract
The present article is related to the interpretation of the Constitution, particularly what some theorists have named as “originalism”. In this way, is important to study the historical context in which this movement emerged, as well as the factors that led to it. In the development of this work, it will be noticed that there are different ways of understanding what originalism means, and that not necessarily all the supporters of this current understand the legal interpretation on the same way. Finally, reference will be made to the main criticisms it has received, especially from those who consider that the Constitution should be understood as a living instrument, that should be adapted to the needs of each society.
Downloads
Article Details
References (SEE)
Balkin, J. The roots of the Living Constitution. Boston University Law Review, n.° 92, 2012.
Barnett. R. Trumping precedent with original meaning: not as radical as it sounds. En
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and other works, Constitutional Commentary
, 2005.
Barnett, R. Interpretation and Construction. En Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, vol. 34, n.° 1, 2011.
Brest, P. The Misconceived Quest for the Original Understanding. En Boston University
Law Review, n.° 60, 1980.
Breyer, S. Cómo hacer funcionar la democracia. El punto de vista de un juez, México
D.F, Fondo de Cultura Económica, 2017.
Chemerinsky, E. y Parker, R. Constitucionalismo Popular, Bogotá, Siglo del Hombre
Editores, 2011.
Delgado, D. Obergefell contra Hodges: la sentencia de la Corte Suprema de los Estados Unidos sobre el matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo. En Revista de Derecho Político de la UNED, n.° 99, 2017.
Durchslag, M. The Supreme Court and the Federalist Papers: Is There Less Here Than
Meets the Eye? En William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal, n.° 14, 2005.
Elster, J. Ulises desatado. Estudios sobre racionalidad, precompromiso y restricciones,
Barcelona, Gedisa, 2002.
Fioravanti, M. Constitución. De la antigüedad a nuestros días, Madrid, Trotta, 2011.
Fioravanti, M. Constitucionalismo. Experiencias históricas y tendencias actuales, Madrid, Editorial Trotta, 2014..
Fleming, J. Are we all originalists now? I hope not! En Texas Law Review, n.° 91, 2013.
Friedman, B. The history of the countermajoritarian difficulty, Part One: the road to judicial supremacy. En New York University Law Review, n.° 73, 1998. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.60449
Grossi, P. La Constitución italiana como expresión de un tiempo jurídico posmoderno. En Historia Constitucional, n.° 15, 2014.
Häberle, P. Tiempo y Constitución. Ámbito público y jurisdicción constitucional, Lima,
Palestra, 2017
Kahn, R. Originalism, the living Constitution, and Supreme Court decision making in the twenty-first century: explaining Lawrence vs. Texas. En Maryland Law Review, n.° 67, 2007.
Kay, R. “Originalist” values and constitutional interpretation. En Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, n.° 19, 1996.
Kelso, R. Contra Scalia, Thomas, and Gorsuch: originalist should adopt a living constitution. En University of Miami Law Review, n.° 72, 2017.
Lambert, E. El gobierno de los jueces, Madrid, Tecnos, 2010.
Moreno, G. El control jurisdiccional de constitucionalidad. La experiencia estadounidense como paradigma del activismo judicial. En Anuario de la Facultad de Derecho, vol. xxix, 2011.
Notes. Original meaning and its limits. En Harvard Law Review, n.° 20, 1997.
Pildes, R. Is the Supreme Court a “Majoritarian” institution? En New York University Public Law and Legal Theory, Working Papers, 2011, n.° 251. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/658919
Pisarello, G. Un largo termidor. La ofensiva del constitucionalismo antidemocrático, Madrid, Trotta, 2011.
Pojanowski, J. and Walsch, K. Enduring originalism. En The Georgetown Law Journal, n.° 105, 2016.
Post, R. and Siegel, R. Originalism as a political practice: the rights´s living Constitution. En Fordham Law Review, n.° 75, 2006.
Ruipérez, Javier. Algunas consideraciones sobre la reforma constitucional. En Revista de Estudios Políticos, n.° 75, 1992.
Sager, L. Juez y Democracia. Una teoría de la práctica constitucional norteamericana, Madrid, Marcial Pons, 2007.
Scalia, A. Los tribunales del common law en un sistema de Derecho continental. En: Gutman, Amy. Una cuestión de interpretación. Los tribunales federales y el derecho, Lima, Palestra Editores, 2015.
Smith, T. Why originalism won´t die. Common mistakes in competing theories of judicial interpretation. En Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy, n.° 2, 2007.
Solum, L. District of Columbia v. Heller and originalism. En Northwestern University Law Review, n.° 103, 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1241655
Tribe, L. The Invisible Constitution, Nueva York, Oxford University Press, 2008.
Tushnet, M. Heller and the New Originalism. En Ohio State Law Journal, vol. 69, 2008.
Varol, O. The Origins and Limits of Originalism: a Comparative Study. En Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, n.° 44, 2011.
Viola, F. Rule of Law. El gobierno de la ley, ayer y hoy, Lima, Palestra, 2017.
Waldron, J. Derechos y Desacuerdos, Madrid, Marcial Pons, 2005.
Waluchow, W. Una teoría del control judicial basada en el Common Law, Madrid, Editorial Marcial Pons, 2009.
Whitesell, S.L. The Church of Originalism. En University of Pennsylvania. Journal of Constitutional Law, n.° 16, 2014.
Whittington, K. New Originalism. En The Georgetown Journal of Law & Public Policy, vol. 2, 2004.
Whittington, K. Originalism: a critical introduction. En Fordham Law Review, vol. 82, n.° 2, 2013.
Wolfe, C. La transformación de la interpretación constitucional, Madrid, Civitas, 1991, p. 353.
Wróblewski, J. Constitución y teoría general de la interpretación jurídica, Madrid, Civitas Ediciones, 2001, p. 76.
Citado por
