Things to Read This Week (3/16/26)
from YJLH to IU
I am actually spending my time in awe and wonder at one of America’s most beautiful places rather than reading anything, but in case you aren’t so lucky:
The big news is that the Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities symposium on Jonathan Gienapp’s book is finally out. I’ve already posted about my entry with Steve Sachs (“Yes, the Founders Were Originalists”), and I especially liked Kevin Walsh’s In The Beginning There Was Positive Law: Section 25, Calder v. Bull, and Constitutional Continuity. The issue also contains Gienapp’s extensive response, The Constitution and Historical Rupture, about 45% of which is directed at our piece. I’m inclined to think that a further sur-reply isn’t necessary and wouldn’t be productive, but if you read the exchange and disagree please leave a comment!
Against General Law Constitutionalism, by Josh Macey, Ketan Ramakrishnan, and Brian Richardson. Obviously I don’t agree with this one either, but flagging it here, and flattered that so many people feel the need to be against it.
The Structure of a Federal Appeal, by Tyler Lindley, probably the single best up-and-coming federal courts scholar. This is one of those nerdy and tricky papers that federal courts students everywhere will probably appreciate.
Some Musings on the SAVE America Act, a detailed, evenhanded account by Derek Muller.
And finally, not yet on SSRN, but last week I returned home to deliver the Jerome Hall Lecture at Indiana University. My title was Beyond Tit-For-Tat, and my topic was the problem of unilateral disarmament in constitutional law. “Why should I follow the rules if you might not? Why should you follow the rules if I might not?” And what can game theory tell us about the prospects of maintaining equilibrium?
I hope to have a write-up soon (speaking of which, does anybody know how to Bluebook a Magic: The Gathering card?) but meanwhile you can watch here:
