‘Tis a Gift to be Simple1

I confess. (Actually, I boast.) I’m a simple-minded originalist. I believe that given what we accept as legally authoritative, the proper way to interpret the Constitution (and statutes, regulations, and judicial orders as well) is to seek its authors’ intended meanings – the same thing we do when we read a letter from Mom, a shopping list from our spouse, or instructions for how to assemble a child’s toy made in China. Interpreting the Constitution and interpreting a toy’s assembly instructions are two tokens of the same type, namely a search for the authors’ intended meaning.

Because simple-minded originalism is considered heretical among most legal academics – even if it is so orthodox among ordinary folks as to escape notice – I shall attempt to defend it. But that defense will not be lengthy. The defense of simple-minded originalism is, well, simple.