God and Man in Court: Graglia’s Quarrel with God

PROFESSOR Graglia denounces my critiques of Judge Robert Bork and Chief Justice William Rehnquist because, as a “hard-core political conservative” I should not have called into question the authority of these high priests of judicial conservatism.

I do believe the quest for consensus in a major political party justifies many concessions for the sake of larger goals. I supported Judge Bork’s nomination and contributed money to his cause. Even today I believe he would have made a better Justice than Kennedy, Souter, or O’Connor. But Rehnquist and Bork have identified themselves with a jurisprudence of original intent. I share with them the conviction that only such a jurisprudence can counteract the liberal judicial activism that like a cancer is eating away the substance of our Constitution. I have, however, proved— beyond I think a reasonable doubt—that what they call original intent is not that of those who framed and ratified the Constitution. They identify original intent—as does Graglia—with a legal positivism that is completely alien to the thought of the founding generation.

HV

About the Author

Harry V. Jaffa

Featured Tags

Declaration of Independence

PROFESSOR Graglia denounces my critiques of Judge Robert Bork and Chief Justice William Rehnquist because, as a “hard-core political conservative” I should not have called into question the authority of these high priests of judicial conservatism.

I do believe the quest for consensus in a major political party justifies many concessions for the sake of larger goals. I supported Judge Bork’s nomination and contributed money to his cause. Even today I believe he would have made a better Justice than Kennedy, Souter, or O’Connor. But Rehnquist and Bork have identified themselves with a jurisprudence of original intent. I share with them the conviction that only such a jurisprudence can counteract the liberal judicial activism that like a cancer is eating away the substance of our Constitution. I have, however, proved— beyond I think a reasonable doubt—that what they call original intent is not that of those who framed and ratified the Constitution. They identify original intent—as does Graglia—with a legal positivism that is completely alien to the thought of the founding generation.