Page 7 - Constitution Matter News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

Binding law as it is the what is signed by the president. it's gone through the senate and the house, and that is the law. but it also is a practical or functional matter. i think having seen the legislative process, i know how compromises come together in the house and the senate, within the senate, within the house. there is negotiations late at night over precise words and compromises, e compromises, inevitably. when we depart from the words specified in the text of the institute, we are potentially upsetting the compromise that you all carefully negotiated in the legislative negotiations t...

I would keep an open mind on that case under the precedent, first amendment law, and would think about that. the policy question i think is really for congress in the first place to determine, assess, study exactly what kind of disclosure requirements should be put in place. >> the potential hassard there is that the unleashed power of unlimited political dark money then becomes like a ratchet. the obstacle to solving that problem. and i hope you can understand that as a matter of political principle. >> i do understand the concerns about money in the political system. when i worked for -- in ...

What it is that you have to intercept? -- interpret? is it what we say or subjectively intended? >> it is what is written in the text of the statute, senator. justice kagan said it well at a talk two years ago, maybe three, at harvard law school. i was present in the audience. she said we are all textualists now. she was talking about justice scalia who brought about significant change this the focus of all federal judges. i have seen it acrossed supposed philosophical spectrum. all federal judges pay close attention to the text of the statute, and that's why i think justice kagan said we are ...

Compromise, even if we think we would have struck the compromise in a different place. as judges, that's not really our role. as a formal and functional matter, i think it's important to stick to the text. there are canons of interpretation which owe kag-- cause you to super impose a presumption on the text. otherwise, sticking to what you passed is important. >> you certainly consider yourself a textualist. if you follow justice kagan's statement, we are all textualists now. that's what judging is? >> judging is paying attention to the text. in starch other cases, paying attention to the text...

Constitutionaltecticonstitution- constitutionists, i think those are referring to the same things, the words the constitution matter. as i have said repeatedly, you look at historical -- the history. you look at the tradition. federalist 39 -- 37 tells us to look at the liquidation of the meaning by historical practice easter time and then you look at precedent, which is woven into article 3, as i said, in federalist 78. but, you know, start with the words as justice kagan said. we are all originalists now in that respect of paying at least some attention to or more than some, paying attention...