fcv@rachelshelden Seems like a front to inject authoritarianism into legal decision making. Yes laws should serve “common good”, but there is no concensus on what “common good” is. The public needs to be the primary player in defining this. How can they propose to start ruling with this thing called “common good”, but never define it, or even try to. They’re proposing building a legal infrastructure on top of an unstable foundation. #ConstitutionalLaw
Politically Androgynous@fcv @rachelshelden
#Originalism and #Textualism: both intellectually lazy, and only useful to rationalize an immoral opinion
Originalists believe their positions serve the #CommonGood. This would just be them saying that, instead of pretending there’s a good basis for their position.
Let’s call this “Ultracon #Constitutionalism v.3”