The rushed confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett should cause people to question the absurd idea that originalism is a-political while RGB’s perspective was highly activist. Both legal stances are
equally political and activist in their positioning of the law vis-á-vis the contemporary moral landscape. That, however, does not make the perspectives equal.
Bringing a “what-if ” interpretation of the past into the current moment allows Scalia/Barrett scholars to pretend they follow the intent of the country’s founders while projecting their values onto our future. Those beliefs imagined freedom and justice for all, but also silenced women, counted African-Americans as 3/5 of a person, and eradicated Native Peoples from the landscape, making that land available for expropriation as terra nullius.
Sen. Daines will vote to confirm Barrett, and Rep. Gianforte, should he become governor, will certify the consequences of Daines’ vote within Montana.
Having silenced Williams with the absurd equation, Williams=Pelosi, Rosendale certainly would remind Washington that, in spite of Jennette Rankin’s legacy, women’s voices really don’t count. Should Barrett’s originalist interpretations become law, let’s hope Daines’ daughters never have to rely on IVF, or even birth control, for they would risk becoming outlaws in their own land.
Laurence M. Carucci
Bozeman
Bozeman Daily Chronicle Letter to the Editor 10/29/20