Of inkblots and originalism: historical ambiguity and the case of the Ninth Amendment.

Publication: Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy

Publication Date: 22-MAR-08

Bookmark this article Print this article Link to this article Email this article Digg It! Add to del.icio.us RSS

COPYRIGHT 2008 Harvard Society for Law and Public Policy, Inc.

Ever since Justice Goldberg's concurring opinion in Griswold v. Connecticut, (1) the Ninth Amendment has been a flashpoint in debates over the merits of originalism as an interpretive theory. Judge Bork's comparison of interpreting the Ninth Amendment to reading a text obscured by an inkblot (2) has been particularly subjected to intense criticism. (3) The metaphor has been attacked as erasing the Ninth Amendment from the Constitution, and as representing the inevitably selective and inconsistent use of text and history by so-called originalists. (4)

It turns out, however, that not only was Judge Bork right to reject Justice Goldberg's reading of the Ninth Amendment, his inkblot metaphor illustrates precisely the approach that a principled originalist must take in the face of historical silence or ambiguity. The more historical evidence that comes to light regarding the Ninth Amendment, the more Judge Bork's original instincts have been vindicated.

I. A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO THE MODERN PRACTICE OF ORIGINALISM

Originalism has evolved during the last several decades. Although past formulations sometimes looked for the Founders' intent, today the more sophisticated forms of originalism seek the meaning of the text as it was likely understood by those who added the provision to the Constitution. (5)

This emphasis on the original understanding of the ratifiers can be traced back to the Founding generation itself. James Madison, for example, expressly embraced the idea that the meaning of the Constitution should reflect the understanding of the state ratifying conventions. (6) According to Madison, the Constitution as proposed by its framers "was nothing more than the draught of a plan, nothing but a dead letter, until life and validity were breathed into it, by the voice of the people, speaking through the several state conventions." (7)

Madison's emphasis on the ratifiers' understanding reflects...

Read the full article for free courtesy of your local library.