- Interpreting the Constitution according to its plain, present, public meaning (rather than its original one);
- Constructing the Constitution as we would a standard form agreement, thus favoring individual rights over federal powers;
- Deciding cases involving Constitutional rights by Citizen Courts structured akin to the panels that help to guarantee the fairness of commercial arbitration procedures; and
- understanding the Second Amendment to protect subjects from militias (rather than preparing them to serve on militias).
For a simple picture of the sort of non-originalist constitutional theory I promoted—a "consensualist" theory—consider the following, modeled on the Nolan Chart:
I swallowed hard and conceded that a consensualist reading of the Constitution might support an argument in favor of a general federal dole. I see that as a fair price for showing that I didn't choose my theory just to support my favorite policies, however, and think that liberty still comes out ahead. A consensualist reading of the constitution puts very strict limits on the federal government's power to tax and regulate, after all.
I welcome your comments on either the PowerPoint presentation or the brief written document that I prepared to accompany the talk.