Political scientists study the framers for various reasons. Some engage
in a traditional originalist enterprise, namely they try to figure out
the legal meaning of constitutional language at the time the
constitution was drafted/ratified.
My own interest is in how persons in 1787 thought the constitution would
function. This is a somewhat different question. Thus, most of the
framers thought George Washington would become the first president,
although obviously this was not a matter of constitutional law
(constitutional expectations?).
I think a good many reasons exist for studying how people expected the
constitution to function, but notice this allows me not to worry about
disagreements over meanings or efforts to figure out a collective mind.
If there are disagreements over what the constitution means, this for me
is interesting in its own right. No need exists WITHIN ME RESEARCH
AGNEDA to figure out who was right.
Mark A. Graber
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/01/03 18:54 PM >>>
As a non-historian and a non-political scientist, let me asks
the
following questions: (1) Does originalism presuppose the Framers held
one
determinate view regarding constitutional meaning? Does it permit the
Framers'
holding several different views? (2) How does one establish such either
view? (3)
How do historians (and political scientists) deal with the problem of
ascertaining "collective intent," a problem that Dworkin and more
recently George
Fletcher, as well as many others have emphasized? (2) Do those
supporting original
intent or original understanding appreciate the enormous commitments to
differing philosophies of mind involved in either theory? (4) How do we
ascertain
the intent---subjective or objective---of a particular Framer? (5) How
do we
ascertain the public meaning of a critical political or legal term even
in
contemporary society let alone in the past? and (6) To what are we
referring when we
make claims that the original intent or understanding of a
constitutional
provision is X? (7) What evidentiary techniques are required to
substantiate such
claims? Apologies if some of these questions overlap.
Bobby Lipkin
Widener University School of Law
Delaware
