重建与抵抗

IF 2.2 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
K. Roosevelt
{"title":"重建与抵抗","authors":"K. Roosevelt","doi":"10.5040/9780755621415.ch-013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This review essay considers Jack Balkin’s two recent books, Living Originalism and Constitutional Redemption. It argues that Balkin’s theoretical contribution is substantial. His reconciliation of originalism and living constitutionalism is correct and should mark a real advance in constitutional theory and scholarship. Political considerations may, however, complicate its reception. Something like political considerations seem also to have complicated Balkin’s theory. He suggests that we may think of American constitutional history as an attempt to redeem the promises of the Declaration of Independence. I argue that the Reconstruction Amendments are a much more appropriate focus for redemption and speculate that Balkin chooses the Declaration instead because it has a universal appeal that the Reconstruction Amendments do not. But by making his theory consistent with our national mythology of a successful constitutional experiment — a mythology that slights the Civil War and Reconstriction — Balkin actually accedes to a political program he probably does not endorse.","PeriodicalId":47670,"journal":{"name":"Texas Law Review","volume":"91 1","pages":"121"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2012-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reconstruction and Resistance\",\"authors\":\"K. Roosevelt\",\"doi\":\"10.5040/9780755621415.ch-013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This review essay considers Jack Balkin’s two recent books, Living Originalism and Constitutional Redemption. It argues that Balkin’s theoretical contribution is substantial. His reconciliation of originalism and living constitutionalism is correct and should mark a real advance in constitutional theory and scholarship. Political considerations may, however, complicate its reception. Something like political considerations seem also to have complicated Balkin’s theory. He suggests that we may think of American constitutional history as an attempt to redeem the promises of the Declaration of Independence. I argue that the Reconstruction Amendments are a much more appropriate focus for redemption and speculate that Balkin chooses the Declaration instead because it has a universal appeal that the Reconstruction Amendments do not. But by making his theory consistent with our national mythology of a successful constitutional experiment — a mythology that slights the Civil War and Reconstriction — Balkin actually accedes to a political program he probably does not endorse.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47670,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Texas Law Review\",\"volume\":\"91 1\",\"pages\":\"121\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Texas Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5040/9780755621415.ch-013\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Texas Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5040/9780755621415.ch-013","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇评论文章考虑了杰克·巴尔金最近的两本书,《活着的原旨主义》和《宪法救赎》。它认为巴尔金的理论贡献是巨大的。他对原旨主义和活的宪政主义的调和是正确的,应该标志着宪法理论和学术的真正进步。然而,政治上的考虑可能会使它的接受复杂化。政治方面的考虑似乎也使巴尔金的理论变得复杂。他认为,我们可以把美国宪法的历史看作是一次试图兑现《独立宣言》承诺的尝试。我认为重建修正案是一个更合适的救赎焦点,并推测巴尔金选择独立宣言是因为它具有重建修正案所没有的普遍吸引力。但是,通过使他的理论与我们国家关于成功的宪法实验的神话——一个轻视内战和收缩的神话——保持一致,巴尔金实际上加入了一个他可能并不赞同的政治计划。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reconstruction and Resistance
This review essay considers Jack Balkin’s two recent books, Living Originalism and Constitutional Redemption. It argues that Balkin’s theoretical contribution is substantial. His reconciliation of originalism and living constitutionalism is correct and should mark a real advance in constitutional theory and scholarship. Political considerations may, however, complicate its reception. Something like political considerations seem also to have complicated Balkin’s theory. He suggests that we may think of American constitutional history as an attempt to redeem the promises of the Declaration of Independence. I argue that the Reconstruction Amendments are a much more appropriate focus for redemption and speculate that Balkin chooses the Declaration instead because it has a universal appeal that the Reconstruction Amendments do not. But by making his theory consistent with our national mythology of a successful constitutional experiment — a mythology that slights the Civil War and Reconstriction — Balkin actually accedes to a political program he probably does not endorse.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
6.20%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Texas Law Review is a national and international leader in legal scholarship. Texas Law Review is an independent journal, edited and published entirely by students at the University of Texas School of Law. Our seven issues per year contain articles by professors, judges, and practitioners; reviews of important recent books from recognized experts, essays, commentaries; and student written notes. Texas Law Review is currently the ninth most cited legal periodical in federal and state cases in the United States and the thirteenth most cited by legal journals.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信