Originalism is a way of interpreting the Constitution that could help it be understood through either framer’s intent or what the public would’ve intended at the Constitution’s ratification. Supporters say the Constitution needs modern interpretation, even if some pre-existing circumstances are nonexistent. Others argue it doesn’t make sense to keep our laws limited to what society back then would’ve valued.
In this context, we debate: Should the Supreme Court Focus on the Original Meaning of the Constitution?
Arguing Yes: Randy Barnett
Arguing No: Prof. Thomas Colby
Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Agree to Disagree: Meritocracy
#196 - Is Cancel Culture Toxic?
Agree to Disagree: Booster Shots
Agree to Disagree: Cyber War and Hacker Ransoms
#195 - Should We Expand the Supreme Court?
#194 - Is the United Nations Obsolete?
Agree to Disagree: Build Back Better
Agree to Disagree COVID Series: Vaccine Mandates (Updated)
Agree to Disagree: Leaving Afghanistan
Debate Roundup: America's Guns
#193 - Has the New York Times Lost Its Way?
Is It Time to Redistribute the Wealth?
Agree to Disagree COVID Series: Vaccine Mandates
The State of Debate: An Intelligence Squared Roundtable
Ray Dalio on How To Change Your Mind
Is Bitcoin More Than a Bubble and Here to Stay?
Is Anti-Zionism the New Anti-Semitism?
#192 - Is Taiwan Indefensible?
Agree to Disagree COVID Series: Vaccine Passports
#191 - Should We Legalize Psychedelics?
Create your
podcast in
minutes
It is Free
In the Great Khan’s Tent
Visualize Meditations
The No-Frills Teacher Podcast
The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast
The Mel Robbins Podcast