Drives outcomes
Which interpretive method a justice uses often shapes rulings on guns, abortion, regulation, and presidential power.
In plain English
Originalists ask what the Constitution's words meant to the people who ratified them — not what judges today might prefer them to mean.
Example
Recent Supreme Court majorities have applied originalist reasoning in major Second Amendment and administrative-law decisions.
Why it matters
What the term actually changes.
Confirmation battles
Senate fights over judicial nominees are, at bottom, fights over interpretive philosophy like originalism versus living constitutionalism.
How it works
The mechanics, in practice.
Historical meaning
Judges examine founding-era dictionaries, debates, and practices to fix what the text meant when adopted.
Applying it today
That fixed meaning is then applied to modern facts — even technologies and situations the founders never imagined.
Related guide
What is judicial review?
Judicial review is the power American courts use to decide whether a law or government action violates the Constitution.
Read the guide → Related issue brief
Should the Senate eliminate the filibuster?
The filibuster lets 41 senators block most legislation by refusing to end debate. Supporters say it protects minority rights. Critics say it makes Congress incapable of acting.
Read the brief →You’ve learned the term. Now vote.
Should the United States adopt a single-payer healthcare system?
Live results — 116 voters
Anonymous · one vote per person
America has spoken.
Live community results — based on 116 anonymous votes.
See the full breakdown — by state and political lean