The Law and the Constitution
I CONSIDER MYSELF an originalist, but let me distinguish another kind. Another kind would say, āJudges do not have the power to make law. Thatās given to the legislature. And to make sure that the judges are not infusing their own beliefs and ideas into the constitutional text, we have to read it literally. We have to cast our minds back over more than two centuries and try to divine how the founding fathers or the authors of the Fourteenth Amendment . . . would decide that.ā I say, āThatās exactly what Iām doing, but Iām putting those menāand they were all men who wrote the Constitutionāwith us today.ā And I know that Thomas Jefferson, who prized equality so much but was himself a slave owner, would applaud how that idea of equality has expanded over the decades.
āThe Aaron Harber Show
THE FOUNDING FATHERS thought in the natural rights vein. Human rights, in their view, antedated the state (or nation). They were given by Higher Authority. They were not the governmentās to confer. Rather, the government was to be kept from trampling on them.
āUniversity of Arkansas at Little Rock School of Law, February 7, 1990
THE CONSTITUTION WAS a remarkable institution. After all, what it did was it rejected the patriarchal power of kings, and it said that peopleās fortune in the United States was not going to turn on birth status. Those ideas have tremendous growth potential.
āAmerican Enterprise Institute, April 19, 1990
TRYING TO DIVINE what the Framers intended, I must look at that matter two ways. One is what they might have intended immediately for their day, and the other is their larger expectation that the Constitution would govern, as [Justice Benjamin] Cardozo said, not for the passing hour, but for the expanding future.
āconfirmation hearings before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, July 1993
IF I WERE in a state ratifying convention, I would propose including explicitly in the Bill of Rights . . . the basic statement in the Declaration of Independence that all persons are equally entitled to fundamental human rights. Thatās the one guarantee that is central to the Declaration of Independence, the equality guarantee, but is missing from the 1787 Constitution and from the Bill of Rights.
āAmerican Enterprise Institute, April 19, 1990
WHAT MAY SEEM constitutional in the abstract may be revealed as unconstitutional when viewed in a specific, contemporary world contextāa context that the legislators who passed the law foresaw only dimly, if at all.
āPaul M. Hebert Law Center, October 24, 1996
THE LAW EXISTS to govern a society. The law exists in the service of a society. So the experience of the society of course is going to be reflected in the law. If the law is aridly logical, it has nothing to do with the way people live, itās not going to be a successful regime.
ā92nd Street Y, September 26, 2017
THE WORD THAT is never used in the Constitution is āslavery,ā but it was the burning problem. And the original Constitution has certain imperfections. One of them is, in the very first article, the slave trade was allowed to continue until the year 1808. . . . Our original Constitution doesnāt have any equality provision in it because some humans were held in bondage by other humans. Our Constitution didnāt get perfected in that regard until after the Civil War.
āAnnenberg Classroom, December 2006
IF YOU WERE writing a Constitution today, would you look back to an eighteenth-century model and not consider newer constitutions?
āYale Law School, 2013
THE US CONSTITUTION is nearly 220 years old and contains no express provision opposing discrimination on the basis of gender. Equal protection jurisprudence in the United States involves interpretation of the spare command that governing authorities shall not deny to any person āthe equal protection of the laws.ā Those words, inserted into the US Constitution in 1868, were once interpreted narrowly, but over time, they proved to have growth potential.
āUniversity of Cape Town, South Africa, February 10, 2006
EVERY MODERN HUMAN rights document has a statement that men and women are equal before the law. Our Constitution doesnāt. I would like to see, for the sake of my daughter and my granddaughter and all the daughters who come after, that statement as part of our fundamental instrument of Government.
āconfirmation hearings before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, July 1993
THE ADOPTION OF the equal rights amendment would relieve the Courtās uneasiness in the gray zone between interpretation and amendment of the Constitution. It would remove the historical impedimentāthe absence of any intention by eighteenth and nineteenth century Constitution makers to deal with gender-based discrimination. It would add to our fundamental instrument of government a principle under which the judiciary may develop the coherent opinion pattern lacking up to now. It also should end the legislative inertia that retards social change by keeping obsolete disciminatory laws on the books.
āAmerican Bar Association Journal, January 1977
IN THEORY, THE job [of giving men and women equal rights] could be done without an equal rights amendment. But history strongly suggests that the task will continue to be relegated to a legislative backburner without the propelling force supplied by the ERA.
āon the Equal Rights Amendment, Update on Law-Related Education, Spring 1978
ANY HUMAN RIGHTS guarantee that is phrased in grand, general terms is vulnerable to a scare campaign. That is whatās happening to the Equal Rights Amendment. The Equal Rights Amendment is not comparable to the amendment that says eighteen-year-olds can vote. That amendment plainly means eighteen and not seventeen. Because the ERA reads, āEquality under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex,ā people can distort its meaning.
āWomen of Wisdom, 1981
AN EQUAL RIGHTS Amendment is not a cure-all. It takes people who care about implementing the right to ensure that it becomes real and not just [a] paper statement.
āYale Law School, 2013
MEASURED MOTIONS SEEM to me right, in the main, for constitutional as well as common law adjudication. Doctrinal limbs too swiftly shaped, experience teaches, may prove unstable.
āNew York University School of Law, March 9, 1993
IT WOULD BE perverse to interpret the term āLegislatureā in the Elections Clause so as to exclude lawmaking by the people, particularly where such lawmaking is intended to check legislatorsā ability to choose the district lines they run in, thereby advancing the prospect that Members of Congress will in fact be āchosen . . . by the People of the several States.ā
āon the Arizona legislatureās attempt to remove districting power from a voter-appointed commission, court opinion, Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, June 29, 2015
THE LEGISLATUREāS RESPONSIVENESS to the people its members represent is hardly heightened when the representative body can be confident that what it does will not be overturned or modified by the voters themselves.
āon the Arizona legislatureās attempt to remove districting power from a voter-appointed commission, court opinion, Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, June 29, 2015
WHAT DO I think is enduring? āCongress shall pass no law respecting freedom of speech or of the press.ā That right to speak your mind and not worry about big brother government coming down on you and telling you the right way to think, speak, and writeāthatās tremendously important.
āRathbun Lecture on a Meaningful Life at Stanford University, February 6, 2017
THE SECOND AMENDMENT is outdated in the sense that its function has become obsolete. And, in my view, if the court had properly interpreted the Second Amendment, the court would have said, āThat amendment was very important when the nation was new. It gave a qualified right to keep and bear arms, but it was for one purpose only, and that was the purpose of having militiamen who were able to fight to preserve the nation.ā
āThe Takeaway, September 15, 2013
YOU CANNOT HAVE a death penalty thatās administered with an even hand. Thatās the problem. Who gets the death penalty? Itās a roulette wheel, and thatās not a system of justice.
āSmithsonian Associates, February 12, 2015
THE INCIDENCE OF capital punishment has gone down, down, down, so that now I think there are only three states that actually administer the death penalty. Not even whole states, but particular areas of states. It may depend on who is the district attorney. So we may see an end to capital punishment by attrition, as there are fewer and fewer executions.
āWashington Council of Lawyers Summer Pro Bono and Public Interest Forum, July 24, 2017
SOME THINGS THAT I would like to change: one is the electoral college. But that would require a constitutional amendment, which is . . . powerfully hard to do.
āRathbun Lecture on a Meaningful Life at Stanford University, February 6, 2017
THE US JUDICIAL system will be the poorer, I have urged, if we do not both share our experience with, and learn from, legal systems with values and a commitment to democracy similar to our own.
āInternational Academy of Comp...