Northwestern University Law Review
The main burden of Professor Perry's paper is to demonstrate that an originalist may, but need not, be a minimalist. In the course of this project, Perry reiterates his earlier arguments in favor of originalism. He also tentatively endorses minimalism as a background presumption, suggesting that non-minimalist or aggressive judicial review must be affirmatively justified and should be limited to questions that are "vulnerable to majority sentiment."1 His primary argument in favor of minimalism is a democratic or majoritarian one: as between historically plausible interpretations of the written Constitution, the people and their elected representatives, rather than the unelected judiciary, ought to prevail on policy questions.
An Originalist Understanding of Minimalism, 88 Northwestern University Law Review. 175
Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/faculty-publications/304