Constitutional law and jurisprudence need have only contingent historical connections.

Evidence

Constitutional Interpretation concerns the relationship between constitutional law and jurisprudence. The standard view is that the latter determines the former. 3 The revisionist view is that the former determines the latter.’ I wish to sever any necessary-any but the contingent-historical connection between the two. — Philip Chase Bobbitt, Reflections Inspired by My Critics, 884

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to debates about law’s autonomy from theory, similar to arguments in legal realism and Duncan Kennedy’s work. — connects to: Historical practice by the First Congress reveals constitutional meaning beyond pattern alone — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1070; Constitutional argument and constitutional discourse are distinct activities with different boundaries. — Philip Chase Bobbitt, Reflections Inspired by My Critics, 409; When I began writing Constitutional Interpretation, constitutional criticism (and jurisprudence) reflected the universalist ideals of empiricism and scarcely questioned the premises of autonomous human reason (if only on the part of the analyst), which were taken as unproblematic, indeed axiomatic. Since then, many movements have sprung up in the law schools that renounce such an epistemology, especially the hermeneuticist and the communitarian movements. I will say here only that there are many nonfoundationalist, nonrepresentationalist accounts one might give, and that these accounts may differ sharply, especially as to their prescriptive character. (+2 more)

Related

• Constitutional interpretation and constitutional discourse are distinct practices. (similarity 0.84)
• Constitutional argument and constitutional discourse are distinct activities with different boundaries. (similarity 0.83)
• Balkin and Levinson conclude that I must either accept whatever is practiced or abandon my pose as simply a descriptive observer. These descriptions depend on several assumptions that I do not… (similarity 0.83)
• and their presence in our political discourse does not require us to deny them legitimacy or to corrupt our forms of decision according to law. American constitutional law can be a profoundly… (similarity 0.81)
• Postmodern constitutional thought marks a shift from truth to meaning. (similarity 0.81)
• Constitutional doctrine develops as replications and mutations of one fundamental structure (similarity 0.81)
• Historical practice by the First Congress reveals constitutional meaning beyond pattern alone (similarity 0.80)
• Legitimacy can be derived from constitutional practices rather than from justifications. (similarity 0.79)
• Constitutional understanding is cultivated through practical exercises rather than passive reading (similarity 0.79)

Broader Connections

• Historical practice by the First Congress reveals constitutional meaning beyond pattern alone #expands (0.45) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1070
• Constitutional argument and constitutional discourse are distinct activities with different boundaries. #expands (0.45) — Philip Chase Bobbitt, Reflections Inspired by My Critics, 409
• Constitutional interpretation and constitutional discourse are distinct practices. #expands (0.45) — Philip Chase Bobbitt, Reflections Inspired by My Critics, 767
• When I began writing Constitutional Interpretation, constitutional criticism (and jurisprudence) reflected the universalist ideals of empiricism and scarcely questioned the premises of autonomous… #expands (0.40)