I’m traveling today, but I thought many of you might like this article in Dissent from Saul Cornell. Joining what seems to be a ground-swell of historians criticizing constitutional originalism, Cornell points out that so many historians oppose originalism not because they are leftists. They oppose originalism because it employs bad history. Cornell’s argument reminded me of another, written by my Georgia State colleague H. Robert Baker in Common-Place. The article considers the Court’s 2004 Boumediene v. Bush decision, which struck down the Bush administration’s arguments about habeas corpus. Baker notes how deeply historical narrative is implicated in legal opinions Read more