For this week s Three Whisky Happy Hour, the intrepid Lucretia added to her legend by venturing into the asylum at Berkeley to record this episode in person with Georgetown Law Professor Randy Barnett about his new book (co-authored with Evan Bernick), The Original Meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment: Its Letter and Spirit. To remind listeners, Barnett argued the Gonzalez v. Raich case that challenged the unlimited reach of the Commerce
Originalism was supposed to simplify things. Instead of vague and ever-shifting balancing tests based on judges’ impressions of what was good for society, originalism was a return to asking that basic question: What did the words mean to people at the time they were enacted? Don’t like the result? Change the law, don’t pretend it “evolved” through self-interested interpretation.
ellison barber at the white house. ellison, thank you very much. for more on this, let s bring in white orrespondent for the washington examiner . good to see you thanks for having me. the new york times says this is a broad interpretation of executive authority and it is a novel approach and likely to be tested if a courtattle ensues, what do you think? well, you know, if you look through the pages of ts letter that was sent in january, it is clear that they think president trump has the constitutional authority to end this investigation, and that therefore you know prohibits him from obstructing justice, as ellison just read earlier that, wrote in this giuliani or i m sorry, the president s outside attorneys say that he cannot obstruct justice because he is the chief law enforcement officer and therefore would be obstructing himself. that s really what they are arguing here, and it will be interesting to see if they ultimately decline a sit-down interview with mueller s te