Original Understanding

Lawyers are not necessarily historians, and sometimes it shows.

Despite the obvious importance of the Constitution’s original understanding, legal writers attempting to deduce the original understanding often have reached their conclusions based on astonishingly few sources. Furthermore, they sometimes misinterpret the sources they use. Among the malefactors, alas, are some Supreme Court justices and contributors to the nation’s most prestigious law reviews.

In an effort to raise the quality of originalist research, this essay is designed to introduce legal writers to the general range of material readily available for competent work.

Here's an interesting resource from the University of Montana--I haven't had time to give this anything but a cursory scan, but look forward to returning and wading in more deeply.

[Via Angel Shamaya]