Professor J. Joel Alicea examines natural and popular sovereignty in a response published in the National Review. The piece responds to a critique of an article he published in the Notre Law Law Review, which argued originalism is consistent with the natural-law tradition in the American context. The critique in question focused on the popular-sovereignty component of his argument for originalism.
National Review
Date: August 30, 2023
By: J. Joel Alicea
Natural Law and Popular Sovereignty: A Response to My Anonymous Critic
. . .
Another critique fails to establish a divergence between originalism and natural law.
There is an ongoing debate among scholars and commentators about the compatibility of originalism and the natural-law tradition. Most prominently, Harvard law professor Adrian Vermeule and emeritus Amherst professor Hadley Arkes have argued that originalism is incompatible with the natural-law tradition. I have taken the opposite view, arguing in an article in the Notre Dame Law Review (NDLR) that originalism is consistent with the natural-law tradition in the American context. My argument is based on the natural-law position that ultimate political authority rests with the people of a society, and I contend that only originalism respects the people’s legitimate authority in the American constitutional system.
. . .
Click here to view the article.