Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Contents:

Information:

  • Access

Actions:

      • Send article to Kindle

        To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

        Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

        Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

        In This Issue
        Available formats
        ×

        Send article to Dropbox

        To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

        In This Issue
        Available formats
        ×

        Send article to Google Drive

        To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

        In This Issue
        Available formats
        ×
Export citation

This issue of Law and History Review begins with Anat Rosenberg's provocative study of a question that plagues the public square today: what is the difference between advertising and news? A successful attempt to repeal the advertisement duty on British newspapers in the mid-nineteenth century led owners to struggle to differentiate advertising from news. Newspapers’ resulting hierarchy, with news at the top and advertisement relegated to subordinate status, would become the foundation of journalistic practice for some time to come.

Next we are pleased to offer a Symposium entitled, Originalism and Legal History: Rethinking the Special Relationship. Originalism is an ever-protean interpretive philosophy, but it has a few basic postulates: the historical idea that the original public meaning of the Constitution of the United States of America can be made known and the normative idea that this meaning should guide contemporary constitutional interpretation. Originalism came into vogue during the 1980s when leading conservative jurists and Reagan administration officials publicly embraced it. It has only grown in popularity since.

All the while, however, historians in law schools and history departments have also criticized originalism and its expositors for a purportedly problematic historical praxis. At its best, the dialogue between historians and originalist theorists and practitioners has produced some fascinating ruminations on the possibility of textual determinacy and the transformation of legal and political language from the eighteenth century to the present. At its worst, the dialogue has devolved into “an interdisciplinary turf war” without an exit plan.1

This special issue of the Law and History Review seeks to offer new perspectives on the public meanings of the American Constitution, the history of originalism, and the overlapping worlds of partisan politics, constitutional interpretation, and legal scholarship. It brings together original empirical scholarship, intellectual histories, and critical appraisals of originalism. We hope that this issue is just the beginning of a sustained engagement with originalism in the pages of Law and History Review and our other venues. Next year, we will feature an article by Jonathan Gienapp that revisits the methodological transformation of originalism from the late twentieth century to the present. The Docket (lawandhistoryreview.org), our digital arm, will also feature commentary by scholars involved in this conversation, and beyond.

Readers can keep track of the latest goings on at Law and History Review through our twitter account @history_law. The American Society for Legal History's redesigned website can be accessed at https://aslh.net, for all the Society's latest announcements and news.

1. Charles, Patrick J., Historicism, Originalism and the Constitution: The Use and Abuse of the Past in American Jurisprudence (Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, 2014), 8.