What do you think?
Rate this book
The Originalism Trap: How Extremists Stole the Constitution and How We the People Can Take It Back
A rallying cry for a more just approach to the law that bolsters social justice movements by throwing out originalism—the theory that judges should interpret the Constitution exactly as conservatives say the Founders meant it
“The greatest trick conservatives ever pulled was convincing the world that originalism exists. This book is vital for understanding why the world sucks right now.”—Elie Mystal, author of Allow Me to Retort
There is no one true way to interpret the Constitution, but that’s not what originalists want you to think. They’d rather we be held hostage to their “objective” theory that our rights and liberties are bound by history—an idea that was once confined to the fringes of academia. Americans saw just how subjective originalism can be when the Supreme Court cherry-picked the past to deny bodily autonomy to millions of Americans in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health. Though originalism is supposed to be a serious intellectual theory, a closer look reveals its many inherent faults, as it deliberately over-emphasizes a version of history that treats civil rights gains as categorically suspect. According to Madiba K. Dennie, it’s time to let it go.
Dennie discards originalism in favor of a new approach that serves inclusive constitutionalism. She disentangles the Constitution’s ideals from originalist ideology and underscores the ambition of the Reconstruction Amendments, which were adopted in the wake of the Civil War and sought to build a democracy with equal membership for marginalized persons. The Originalism Trap argues that the law must serve to make that promise of democracy real.
Seamlessly blending scholarship with sass and written for law people and laypeople alike, The Originalism Trap shows readers that the Constitution belongs to them and how, by understanding its possibilities, they can use it to fight for their rights. As courts—and the Constitution—increasingly become political battlegrounds, The Originalism Trap is a necessary guide to what’s at stake and a vision for a more just future.
“The greatest trick conservatives ever pulled was convincing the world that originalism exists. This book is vital for understanding why the world sucks right now.”—Elie Mystal, author of Allow Me to Retort
There is no one true way to interpret the Constitution, but that’s not what originalists want you to think. They’d rather we be held hostage to their “objective” theory that our rights and liberties are bound by history—an idea that was once confined to the fringes of academia. Americans saw just how subjective originalism can be when the Supreme Court cherry-picked the past to deny bodily autonomy to millions of Americans in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health. Though originalism is supposed to be a serious intellectual theory, a closer look reveals its many inherent faults, as it deliberately over-emphasizes a version of history that treats civil rights gains as categorically suspect. According to Madiba K. Dennie, it’s time to let it go.
Dennie discards originalism in favor of a new approach that serves inclusive constitutionalism. She disentangles the Constitution’s ideals from originalist ideology and underscores the ambition of the Reconstruction Amendments, which were adopted in the wake of the Civil War and sought to build a democracy with equal membership for marginalized persons. The Originalism Trap argues that the law must serve to make that promise of democracy real.
Seamlessly blending scholarship with sass and written for law people and laypeople alike, The Originalism Trap shows readers that the Constitution belongs to them and how, by understanding its possibilities, they can use it to fight for their rights. As courts—and the Constitution—increasingly become political battlegrounds, The Originalism Trap is a necessary guide to what’s at stake and a vision for a more just future.
292 pages, Kindle Edition
Published June 4, 2024
99 people are currently reading
2768 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 46 reviews
November 23, 2025
Always eager to read about constitutional subjects, I turned to this recent book by Madiba Dennie. Her central hypothesis remains that constitutional originalism is out of sync with current views in the United States, even if the US Supreme Court uses it to create ultra-conservatism legal interpretations within the country. Dennie creates a well-documented piece that explores the US Constitutuon, the Originalism takeover, and how to wrest control back for the people.
While there is no single approach to constitutional interpretation, some would believe that the only way to do so is by adopting a mindset of those who wrote it. This is the Originalism ideology, where people consider constitutional power and freedoms based on how the Founding Fathers (or those who penned future amendments to the document) thought when the ink was still wet on the page. This might seem silly in the United States, but it is the current mindset of the conservative majority on the US Supreme Court, alongside other judges and even some lethal thinkers. While the ideology emerged in the 1980s to push back against too many freedoms sought by the populace, it hid in the weeds for decades. New appointments by a man whose validity for president remains a mystery helped to bring it into the spotlight and has begun dismantling decades of legal precedent under the view that it was poorly adjudicated and not how the original thinkers meant it to be decided. How this makes sense eludes me, as I have always thought the Living Tree interpretation made the most sense to constitutional interpretation, but I am simply a Canadian watching a Dumpster fire from acros the 45th Parallel.
Madiba Dennie explores this Originalism approach over time to analyse significant decisions by America’s highest court and how applying these arcane perspectives dismantle the support of group and individual rights that have long made sense and are clearly documented in the US Constitution. From women’s right to choose, to racist treatment, through to the right to cast a vote and how people’s personal choices should be dictated by clueless politicians and judges. Dennie sifts through cases and rulings throughout this tome and makes cogent arguments about why this ideology has become an outlandish view, now left to linger over the country.
Dennie speaks of how Originalism is less an applicable form of constitutional interpretation and should be left for academic to argue in law journals or at conferences. Rather, she favours the idea of inclusive constitutionalism, in which groups and their views are taken into account and the current temperature of the country is considered. It would make sense that, with the understanding of freedoms laid out in the Constitution, that the vast majority of the population could express a view the courts would take up, rather than impose one from the 18th century to determine how 21st century America is meant to run.
While the walls seem to be crashing down with Originalism pushing things back centuries, Dennie feels that there is hope. She posits that the country does not need to sit idly by and allow the conservative movement spoon out constitutional medicine that must be taken, puckered lips aplenty. Rather, a movement to formally refuse to follow these rules and support an alternate interpretation of consitutional rules may follow. She cites examples of when the ‘Court got it wrong’ and the general pubic spoke out about this, until another case of similar legal merit came along for the Court to correct their misinterpretation. It seems anarchical, but it is actually a form of democracy, for the people to use their voice and make change. I cannot see this happening while ICE is out there clubbing people and the president is clueless to what is best for those he oversees. However, time will tell if the movement gains momentum.
A book of this nature is sure to ruffle some feathers and cause others to get quite excited. Madiba Dennie delivers her points in a clear and scholarly manner, without drowning things in academic jargon. She makes sure to clearly explore each of her topics in a way that can be understood and applies hands-on examples from Court cases to show what she means. Her views are her own, but easily adopted by others. Clear chapters make it simple to follow and things advance effectively in a way that the reader can digest. While she does have a goal here, she does so respectfully and ensures that both sides are heard, even if one is completely contradictory to her point of view. While she does not accept Originalism as being an ideology that ought to be applied to constitutional decisions, she supports its use in academic circles for fruitful debate. I would do the same and feel enlightened to have read and understood all that was brought up in this book. I could not agree more from my Canadian perch, though the Dumpster fire is sure to keep me warm on long, winter nights.
Kudos, Madam Dennie, for an insightful book that pushes the limits and keeps the reader thinking.
Love/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/
While there is no single approach to constitutional interpretation, some would believe that the only way to do so is by adopting a mindset of those who wrote it. This is the Originalism ideology, where people consider constitutional power and freedoms based on how the Founding Fathers (or those who penned future amendments to the document) thought when the ink was still wet on the page. This might seem silly in the United States, but it is the current mindset of the conservative majority on the US Supreme Court, alongside other judges and even some lethal thinkers. While the ideology emerged in the 1980s to push back against too many freedoms sought by the populace, it hid in the weeds for decades. New appointments by a man whose validity for president remains a mystery helped to bring it into the spotlight and has begun dismantling decades of legal precedent under the view that it was poorly adjudicated and not how the original thinkers meant it to be decided. How this makes sense eludes me, as I have always thought the Living Tree interpretation made the most sense to constitutional interpretation, but I am simply a Canadian watching a Dumpster fire from acros the 45th Parallel.
Madiba Dennie explores this Originalism approach over time to analyse significant decisions by America’s highest court and how applying these arcane perspectives dismantle the support of group and individual rights that have long made sense and are clearly documented in the US Constitution. From women’s right to choose, to racist treatment, through to the right to cast a vote and how people’s personal choices should be dictated by clueless politicians and judges. Dennie sifts through cases and rulings throughout this tome and makes cogent arguments about why this ideology has become an outlandish view, now left to linger over the country.
Dennie speaks of how Originalism is less an applicable form of constitutional interpretation and should be left for academic to argue in law journals or at conferences. Rather, she favours the idea of inclusive constitutionalism, in which groups and their views are taken into account and the current temperature of the country is considered. It would make sense that, with the understanding of freedoms laid out in the Constitution, that the vast majority of the population could express a view the courts would take up, rather than impose one from the 18th century to determine how 21st century America is meant to run.
While the walls seem to be crashing down with Originalism pushing things back centuries, Dennie feels that there is hope. She posits that the country does not need to sit idly by and allow the conservative movement spoon out constitutional medicine that must be taken, puckered lips aplenty. Rather, a movement to formally refuse to follow these rules and support an alternate interpretation of consitutional rules may follow. She cites examples of when the ‘Court got it wrong’ and the general pubic spoke out about this, until another case of similar legal merit came along for the Court to correct their misinterpretation. It seems anarchical, but it is actually a form of democracy, for the people to use their voice and make change. I cannot see this happening while ICE is out there clubbing people and the president is clueless to what is best for those he oversees. However, time will tell if the movement gains momentum.
A book of this nature is sure to ruffle some feathers and cause others to get quite excited. Madiba Dennie delivers her points in a clear and scholarly manner, without drowning things in academic jargon. She makes sure to clearly explore each of her topics in a way that can be understood and applies hands-on examples from Court cases to show what she means. Her views are her own, but easily adopted by others. Clear chapters make it simple to follow and things advance effectively in a way that the reader can digest. While she does have a goal here, she does so respectfully and ensures that both sides are heard, even if one is completely contradictory to her point of view. While she does not accept Originalism as being an ideology that ought to be applied to constitutional decisions, she supports its use in academic circles for fruitful debate. I would do the same and feel enlightened to have read and understood all that was brought up in this book. I could not agree more from my Canadian perch, though the Dumpster fire is sure to keep me warm on long, winter nights.
Kudos, Madam Dennie, for an insightful book that pushes the limits and keeps the reader thinking.
Love/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/
May 12, 2025
Madiba K. Dennie's The Originalism Trap is a withering indictment of originalism as a method of constitutional interpretation. Dennie demonstrates how, far from a bedrock legal theory, originalism is a relatively modern invention whose proponents inconsistently apply it at best, invoking it only when necessary to achieve policy goals. Following this introduction, Dennie then dedicates several chapters to how originalism has been used to undermine our civil liberties, our elections, and our guarantee to equal representation through the census. These chapters are blistering in the criticism leveled at originalism and its adherents, but that criticism is well-founded. The book is thoroughly researched with copious notes for the inquisitive reader to fact-check and learn more. Dennie is not shooting from the hip---she has done her homework.
However, laced throughout the book is hope: what Dennie calls inclusive constitutionalism, or "a framework that interprets the whole Constitution in light of the Reconstruction Amendments' promise to build a functioning multiracial democracy" that includes everyone in this American experiment. This, Dennie proposes, is the antidote to originalism that will help us reclaim our rights and build a nation that might actually live up to its ideals. This through-line culminates in the final chapter where Dennie suggests tactics for both lawyers and laity to enact inclusive constitutionalism, both within the judicial system and our own communities.
On a final note, accessibility for both lawyers and everyday folk is a hallmark of this book. Dennie does not shy away from complicated legal topics, but she writes with a deftness that renders them clear to a non-lawyer such as myself, allowing the reader to arm themselves with some judicial savvy. This, along with witty writing infused by humor, makes the book a joy to read while also teaching something important. I highly recommend the book to all interested parties!
However, laced throughout the book is hope: what Dennie calls inclusive constitutionalism, or "a framework that interprets the whole Constitution in light of the Reconstruction Amendments' promise to build a functioning multiracial democracy" that includes everyone in this American experiment. This, Dennie proposes, is the antidote to originalism that will help us reclaim our rights and build a nation that might actually live up to its ideals. This through-line culminates in the final chapter where Dennie suggests tactics for both lawyers and laity to enact inclusive constitutionalism, both within the judicial system and our own communities.
On a final note, accessibility for both lawyers and everyday folk is a hallmark of this book. Dennie does not shy away from complicated legal topics, but she writes with a deftness that renders them clear to a non-lawyer such as myself, allowing the reader to arm themselves with some judicial savvy. This, along with witty writing infused by humor, makes the book a joy to read while also teaching something important. I highly recommend the book to all interested parties!
July 27, 2024
*Deep inhale*
[In the voice of Riley Freeman of The Boondocks in Season 3 episode 7 "The Fundraiser"]
Look. Fuck the Supreme Court, fuck the "Founding Fathers", fuck the Constitution, fuck originalism, fuck Clarence Thomas, fuck Antonin Scala, fuck Sam Alito, fuck Dobbs, fuck Citizens United, fuck Shelby County v Holder, fuck The Federalist Society, fuck all the flag waving dipshit conservatives who want to bring back the Confederacy. Now get the fuck out of my face, and if I see you in the streets I'm slapping the shit out of you.
The Supreme Court has, outside of a brief period in the middle of the 20th century, been a villain of social progress. But it has been particularly remade in the last few decades into a meatgrinder designed to tilt the scales in favor of conservatives even as a clear majority of Americans favor multiracial secular social democracy. At the core of this is the bs idea of "originalism", a theory for interpreting the constitution that helps rationalize destroying hard fought civil rights and legal protections and enshrining Christian nationalism.
This book is clearly meant for policy folks and folks early in their legal careers who recognize these problems and outlines a novel legal theory for dismantling it: inclusive constitutionalism. This theory embraces the emancipatory potentials of various sections of the Constitution, including notably the political vision that drove the passage of the Reconstruction Amendments.
I respect the work this author put into this book, even if I doubt it will be that easy to do this, and I put no faith in changing Court rulings (I have far more faith in true democratic control that challenges the legitimacy of antidemocratic forces like the SCOTUS). But I'm not a lawyer. So I think this book is great for legal scholars and lawyers, but it does get a bit too heady about case precedents and stuff that might be too much for normal people. Still, a necessary intervention, especially in light of the horrific spate of rulings that came down a few weeks ago. The courts will not rest until they get what they want and it's time people starting fighting back at every level.
[In the voice of Riley Freeman of The Boondocks in Season 3 episode 7 "The Fundraiser"]
Look. Fuck the Supreme Court, fuck the "Founding Fathers", fuck the Constitution, fuck originalism, fuck Clarence Thomas, fuck Antonin Scala, fuck Sam Alito, fuck Dobbs, fuck Citizens United, fuck Shelby County v Holder, fuck The Federalist Society, fuck all the flag waving dipshit conservatives who want to bring back the Confederacy. Now get the fuck out of my face, and if I see you in the streets I'm slapping the shit out of you.
The Supreme Court has, outside of a brief period in the middle of the 20th century, been a villain of social progress. But it has been particularly remade in the last few decades into a meatgrinder designed to tilt the scales in favor of conservatives even as a clear majority of Americans favor multiracial secular social democracy. At the core of this is the bs idea of "originalism", a theory for interpreting the constitution that helps rationalize destroying hard fought civil rights and legal protections and enshrining Christian nationalism.
This book is clearly meant for policy folks and folks early in their legal careers who recognize these problems and outlines a novel legal theory for dismantling it: inclusive constitutionalism. This theory embraces the emancipatory potentials of various sections of the Constitution, including notably the political vision that drove the passage of the Reconstruction Amendments.
I respect the work this author put into this book, even if I doubt it will be that easy to do this, and I put no faith in changing Court rulings (I have far more faith in true democratic control that challenges the legitimacy of antidemocratic forces like the SCOTUS). But I'm not a lawyer. So I think this book is great for legal scholars and lawyers, but it does get a bit too heady about case precedents and stuff that might be too much for normal people. Still, a necessary intervention, especially in light of the horrific spate of rulings that came down a few weeks ago. The courts will not rest until they get what they want and it's time people starting fighting back at every level.
June 4, 2024
A well-written and searing criticism of originalism, which does indeed have many flaws. But Dennie is far too comfortable with what would fill the void if the doctrine were to disappear. While conservatives like justice Thomas take originalism too far--and twist it for political ends--there should be some anchoring of the court's jurisprudence in the words of the constitution. No justice--from the right or left--should have a blank slate to legislate from the bench.
William Cooper, author How America Works ... And Why It Doesn't
William Cooper, author How America Works ... And Why It Doesn't
March 13, 2025
this was really interesting. short, punchy, accessible writing for my Great Return To Reading. some of it a little on the sassy side but i’m no stranger to that. reading about the court is so great. they were dropping bars in those 20th century substantive due process decisions. her “alt” to originalism was only so-so. also i really like how this app feels like it hasn’t been updated since 2012.
December 10, 2024
Meticulously researched and compellingly argued, The Originalism Trap does what it sets out to do—to make you question the soundness of the legal theory by which conservatives have made our democracy less inclusive and more dangerous—while making you laugh. The book is so sharply written, no less intellectually sound or searingly critical for how laugh-out-loud funny it often is. The audiobook is even moreso, Madiba’s inflections making me actively laugh while learning about a subject that just should not be half so interesting to read about.
The point about bringing the Reconstruction Amendments out of the shadows and using them to guide our creation of a more inclusive democracy is very well taken. I don’t know that I’m quite as optimistic as Madiba that the courts would put in a good faith effort to interpret the constitution using inclusive principles for the greater good, but then again this book made me trust the Supreme Court even less. And I didn’t trust them very much to begin with.
I think what I will take away the most (apart from even more disdain for SCOTUS) is just how much ahistorical cherry picking goes into originalism as a theory. It really is completely intellectually bankrupt and used almost solely as a vehicle to uphold white supremacy. Of course it really came to grip the system during the Reagan Administration. What DIDNT that guy ruin.
The point about bringing the Reconstruction Amendments out of the shadows and using them to guide our creation of a more inclusive democracy is very well taken. I don’t know that I’m quite as optimistic as Madiba that the courts would put in a good faith effort to interpret the constitution using inclusive principles for the greater good, but then again this book made me trust the Supreme Court even less. And I didn’t trust them very much to begin with.
I think what I will take away the most (apart from even more disdain for SCOTUS) is just how much ahistorical cherry picking goes into originalism as a theory. It really is completely intellectually bankrupt and used almost solely as a vehicle to uphold white supremacy. Of course it really came to grip the system during the Reagan Administration. What DIDNT that guy ruin.
June 23, 2024
An amazing read! So smart, but so easy to understand. A call to action for those who believe in a representative democracy!
November 12, 2024
The Originalism Trap by Madiba K. Dennie delivers a powerful critique of originalism as a method of constitutional interpretation. Dennie argues that originalism is a modern invention, inconsistently applied by its proponents to push specific policy goals.
She dedicates several chapters to detailing how originalism has eroded civil liberties, distorted elections, and undermined equal representation, all supported by thorough research and extensive notes.
Dennie offers an alternative to Originalism, something she calls inclusive constitutionalism. She provides a call to action to both lawyers and readers on how to move forward.
I am primarily a fiction reader although I do pick up nonfiction books from time to time. I found The Originalism Trap to be extremely readable in terms of language. Dennie also frames her arguments in a digestible and easy to follow manner. I read this book via audio and that's where some of my comprehension issues lie. Dennie refers to several pieces of legislation, court cases and laws - most of which I was not familiar with. It was challenging to pause mid-sentence to do my own research because I mostly listened to this on my commute to work. In hindsight I wish I would have read it physically or electronically to allow me time to look into areas I'm unfamiliar with.
She dedicates several chapters to detailing how originalism has eroded civil liberties, distorted elections, and undermined equal representation, all supported by thorough research and extensive notes.
Dennie offers an alternative to Originalism, something she calls inclusive constitutionalism. She provides a call to action to both lawyers and readers on how to move forward.
I am primarily a fiction reader although I do pick up nonfiction books from time to time. I found The Originalism Trap to be extremely readable in terms of language. Dennie also frames her arguments in a digestible and easy to follow manner. I read this book via audio and that's where some of my comprehension issues lie. Dennie refers to several pieces of legislation, court cases and laws - most of which I was not familiar with. It was challenging to pause mid-sentence to do my own research because I mostly listened to this on my commute to work. In hindsight I wish I would have read it physically or electronically to allow me time to look into areas I'm unfamiliar with.
June 30, 2025
This is a great introduction to the perils of originalist "reasoning" in supreme court cases. Dennie builds on 14th Amendment jurisprudence and advances an alternative vision of inclusive constitutionalism, based on the importance of a wider vision than that which was available to the Framers. I listened to the audiobook, which the author very pleasantly read. Thinking of assigning it for class, at least in part.
August 19, 2024
Another book to add to my “nonfiction that makes me angry” collection. Dennie has an engaging voice and does a good job explaining all this legal skullduggery to laypeople. She’s got a sharp sense of humor and gives practical advice for how we can take back what the originalists have stolen from us.
May 30, 2024
You can also see this review, along with others I have written, at my new blog, Mr. Book's Book Reviews.
Thank you Random House for providing this book for review consideration via NetGalley. All opinions are my own. No review was required in return for an advance reading copy and no review was promised.
Mr. Book just finished The Originalism Trap, by Madiba K. Dennie.
I had listened to this author on several podcasts talking the book, so I was very glad when I had the opportunity to get an advance copy to review. I was glad I did, as it definitely lived up to my expectations.
The author starts by pointing out that originalism is a nice idea, at least in theory. But, once you spend any time thinking through the issues and the problems it presents, it becomes clear that originalism is far from a neutral way to interpret the Constitution. It is instead nothing more than an attempt to cherry pick history to serve the right-wing justice’s policy desires. As Dennie correctly notes, the Venn diagram between originalism’s results and conservative policy preferences results in a complete overlap.
Dennie immediately starts with the Supreme Court’s opinion in Dobbs to show how history was cherry picked. Despite the fact that there was no historical evidence of abortion being prohibited at the time of the founding of the country, the court decided to quote a 17th century male chauvinist judge, whose opinions promoted witch burning and spousal abuse as their support to overturn one of the nation’s “super precedents” of Roe.
She then moves on from there to the Bruen decision on guns, in which prominent legal historians have called “embarrassing” and instead of being based on “history, text and tradition”, it was instead based on “fiction, fantasy and mythology.” But, then instead of just limiting the discussion to the ruling itself, the author does a very good job showing the terrible lower court rulings that have followed as the inevitable result of having to follow the “reasoning” of Bruen.
The author accurate sums up originalism by saying, “Originalism observes that white supremacy dominated the country’s past and reasons that it must also dominate the country’s future.” The book makes the strongest possible case that white supremacy is result, and a goal of originalism.
The section on substantive due process is also excellent. The author again shows how originalism is a threat to individual rights. She also again proves that it just perpetuates the white supremacy and the sexism that has dominated American history, especially in the founding era.
The chapter on voter suppression was another great one.
One indication that something is an A+ book is when I make so many highlights of so many great passages that I can’t keep track of how many I have. This book certainly meets that standard.
I give this book an A+, which also means it is inducted into my Hall of Fame. Amazon, Goodreads and NetGalley require grades on a 1-5 star system. In my personal conversion system, an A+ equates to 5 stars. (A or A+: 5 stars, B+: 4 stars, B: 3 stars, C: 2 stars, D or F: 1 star).
I have already placed a preorder for the Audible audiobook version, so I will be able to enjoy it again when it is released.
This review has been posted at NetGalley, Goodreads and my blog, Mr. Book’s Book Reviews. It will be posted at Amazon when it is released on June 4.
Mr. Book originally finished reading this on May 30, 2024.
Thank you Random House for providing this book for review consideration via NetGalley. All opinions are my own. No review was required in return for an advance reading copy and no review was promised.
Mr. Book just finished The Originalism Trap, by Madiba K. Dennie.
I had listened to this author on several podcasts talking the book, so I was very glad when I had the opportunity to get an advance copy to review. I was glad I did, as it definitely lived up to my expectations.
The author starts by pointing out that originalism is a nice idea, at least in theory. But, once you spend any time thinking through the issues and the problems it presents, it becomes clear that originalism is far from a neutral way to interpret the Constitution. It is instead nothing more than an attempt to cherry pick history to serve the right-wing justice’s policy desires. As Dennie correctly notes, the Venn diagram between originalism’s results and conservative policy preferences results in a complete overlap.
Dennie immediately starts with the Supreme Court’s opinion in Dobbs to show how history was cherry picked. Despite the fact that there was no historical evidence of abortion being prohibited at the time of the founding of the country, the court decided to quote a 17th century male chauvinist judge, whose opinions promoted witch burning and spousal abuse as their support to overturn one of the nation’s “super precedents” of Roe.
She then moves on from there to the Bruen decision on guns, in which prominent legal historians have called “embarrassing” and instead of being based on “history, text and tradition”, it was instead based on “fiction, fantasy and mythology.” But, then instead of just limiting the discussion to the ruling itself, the author does a very good job showing the terrible lower court rulings that have followed as the inevitable result of having to follow the “reasoning” of Bruen.
The author accurate sums up originalism by saying, “Originalism observes that white supremacy dominated the country’s past and reasons that it must also dominate the country’s future.” The book makes the strongest possible case that white supremacy is result, and a goal of originalism.
The section on substantive due process is also excellent. The author again shows how originalism is a threat to individual rights. She also again proves that it just perpetuates the white supremacy and the sexism that has dominated American history, especially in the founding era.
The chapter on voter suppression was another great one.
One indication that something is an A+ book is when I make so many highlights of so many great passages that I can’t keep track of how many I have. This book certainly meets that standard.
I give this book an A+, which also means it is inducted into my Hall of Fame. Amazon, Goodreads and NetGalley require grades on a 1-5 star system. In my personal conversion system, an A+ equates to 5 stars. (A or A+: 5 stars, B+: 4 stars, B: 3 stars, C: 2 stars, D or F: 1 star).
I have already placed a preorder for the Audible audiobook version, so I will be able to enjoy it again when it is released.
This review has been posted at NetGalley, Goodreads and my blog, Mr. Book’s Book Reviews. It will be posted at Amazon when it is released on June 4.
Mr. Book originally finished reading this on May 30, 2024.
February 1, 2025
I would have finished reading it a bit quicker but I had to alternate reading this book with Alexandra Rowland's "Running Close to the Wind". Anger and frustration with the fauxriginalists (word coined by Madiba Dennie?) fracturing of the judicial system had to be eased by reading humor fantasy. The arch conservative white supremacist majority which, ironically, includes Justice Thomas, think the US Constitution should be interpreted by white men of property for white men of property. Trying to argue what the 'founding fathers' meant they pick and choose and ignore history. Jefferson cautioned against reverence of the constitution by future generations saying on might as well have a man 'wear the coat he wore as a boy'. Dr. Dennie goes through how the right-wing is stealing our liberties, our elections, and the census using their take on what they want to have us believe the founding fathers intended. While they supposedly use 'tradition' and 'stare decisis' to judge they cherry pick and ignore history. Like I said in the beginning, one might want to have a humor book to ease emotions.
November 8, 2024
This was a hard book for me to read the week that the democratic process gave America a President who doesn’t believe in equity or fairness or justice.
The author was arguing, quite forcefully, that the current Supreme Court is wrongly interpreting the law in its rulings about voting rights and other rights coming out of the Reconstruction era amendments. Abortion, mixed race marriage, same sex marriage - are these pendulum swing issues, or continuum issues? These days it’s hard to say!
I liked her concept of decree vs dialogue. We can discuss and listen, not just lay down the law.
She is offering up an alternative to the originalist interpretation of the Constitution. She supports inclusive Constitutionalism. The pathway can be “an active hope of righteous refusal.”
I need to believe that being persistent in promoting righteousness can bring progress.
The author was arguing, quite forcefully, that the current Supreme Court is wrongly interpreting the law in its rulings about voting rights and other rights coming out of the Reconstruction era amendments. Abortion, mixed race marriage, same sex marriage - are these pendulum swing issues, or continuum issues? These days it’s hard to say!
I liked her concept of decree vs dialogue. We can discuss and listen, not just lay down the law.
She is offering up an alternative to the originalist interpretation of the Constitution. She supports inclusive Constitutionalism. The pathway can be “an active hope of righteous refusal.”
I need to believe that being persistent in promoting righteousness can bring progress.
January 10, 2025
There are far too few reviews for this book so while I’d rate this a 4.5, I’m rounding this up so that this has a snowball’s chance of getting through to people. This is such an important and well-written book that really goes after the theory of “originalism” as the method of interpretation for the constitution - how it has undermined “we the people” for decades with the excuse of being used for our betterment, yet that never actually coalesces.
Also, wow. Just…the amount of cherry picking these men are allowed to get away with in the name of “democracy” is sickening. And God help me, Alito is an absolute piece of garbage, yes but if I could ever learn something about Reagan and be surprised by how absolutely HORRIFIC that human was…?? Nothing I learn about him is shocking anymore, almost everything leads back to that slimeball’s administration.
Also, wow. Just…the amount of cherry picking these men are allowed to get away with in the name of “democracy” is sickening. And God help me, Alito is an absolute piece of garbage, yes but if I could ever learn something about Reagan and be surprised by how absolutely HORRIFIC that human was…?? Nothing I learn about him is shocking anymore, almost everything leads back to that slimeball’s administration.
January 12, 2025
This book is about how legal conclusions in a court of law depend on how the US Constitution is interpreted in our justice system and government. Like the title, it explains what originalism is and how originalists try to limit our democracy and preserve outdated beliefs that no longer fit today’s world based on what they believe the founders meant when the document was originally written 200 years ago (in 2024 if you know better, do better). It dives into the significance and importance of the Reconstruction Amendments that demonstrate our country’s civil growth over time. The author also goes into current events that makes the book relatable to the reader and most importantly, she reminds the reader that the future of rights, justice and equality lie in our hands—we the people, that is.
“Real power comes from us”
Good ass read.
“Real power comes from us”
Good ass read.
April 1, 2025
This book is a fantastic, accessible critique of the leading conservative legal theory—it lays out the basis for a progressive alternative grounded in the Reconstruction Amendments and takes the backwards-reasoning of Originalism head on.
While I will admit that as a law geek I was hoping for something more akin to a law review note tearing Originalism down from its shoddy foundation there is something to be said about how she approaches this subject for a broader audience. Dennie writes authoritatively on heady legal concepts (with proper Bluebook citations, a touch I appreciated) but in such a way that the lay reader can easily grasp the arguments she is making. It’s refreshing to see an optimistic and progressive counterbalance to the “originalist” legal theory that has been strangling any meaningful societal progress for my entire adult life.
While I will admit that as a law geek I was hoping for something more akin to a law review note tearing Originalism down from its shoddy foundation there is something to be said about how she approaches this subject for a broader audience. Dennie writes authoritatively on heady legal concepts (with proper Bluebook citations, a touch I appreciated) but in such a way that the lay reader can easily grasp the arguments she is making. It’s refreshing to see an optimistic and progressive counterbalance to the “originalist” legal theory that has been strangling any meaningful societal progress for my entire adult life.
September 4, 2024
The book was a very informative read on the originalist interpretation of the constitution that has permeated through our legal system at the highest level since the Reagan administration. Unfortunately, this book suffers from the same issue that the book “Allow Me to Retort” - Elie Mystal does: it’s cringe in a “hello fellow kids” type of way. The amount of interjection’s of personal bias to say that someone “got caught in 4K” detracts from the authority of the writing. The book leans towards an opinion piece, like the one Lindsey Graham put out today in the NYT. Without the unnecessary interjections, this book could probably be cut down or an academic 150 pages.
P.S. if you physically recoiled at my use of “cringe” in this review, you understand what it’s like to read this book
P.S. if you physically recoiled at my use of “cringe” in this review, you understand what it’s like to read this book
September 14, 2024
"The Originalism Trap" by Madiba Dennie is well-researched, well-documented and absolutely terrifying underneath the weight of its own words.
I really wanted to get a better idea of the concept of "originalism" and what it specifically referred to in the US court system.
I got a lot more than I bargained for. The author goes into exceptional detail about the origins, creators and implementation of this school of thought regarding constitutional law. I still can't claim to understand 100% of the subtleties involved, but what I did understand was disconcerting.
But I did have to temper my reactions. The author has a clear and transparent bias at work and it does reflect in the writing.
But at the end, I definitely knew more about this concept than I ever wanted to.
I really wanted to get a better idea of the concept of "originalism" and what it specifically referred to in the US court system.
I got a lot more than I bargained for. The author goes into exceptional detail about the origins, creators and implementation of this school of thought regarding constitutional law. I still can't claim to understand 100% of the subtleties involved, but what I did understand was disconcerting.
But I did have to temper my reactions. The author has a clear and transparent bias at work and it does reflect in the writing.
But at the end, I definitely knew more about this concept than I ever wanted to.
June 16, 2024
Not much that's exactly _new_ for those of us paying attention, but some details and depth showing these right-wing 'originalists' are worse than many of us thought - that very much includes so-called 'institutionalists' like John Roberts.
In an election, you can't beat somebody with nobody, so here Dennie outlines a framework of 'inclusive constitutionalism' as an alternative to develop and push for. Unlike originalism's dishonesty (called intellectually indefensible by historian Eric Foner), Dennie is honest that inclusion is a value lens, and one of many ways one can read and interpret a constitution that sets a framework for governing among actual people.
In an election, you can't beat somebody with nobody, so here Dennie outlines a framework of 'inclusive constitutionalism' as an alternative to develop and push for. Unlike originalism's dishonesty (called intellectually indefensible by historian Eric Foner), Dennie is honest that inclusion is a value lens, and one of many ways one can read and interpret a constitution that sets a framework for governing among actual people.
June 8, 2024
The Originalism Trap is a compelling critique of originalism and a powerful advocate for a vibrant alternative. Dennie’s accessible, persuasive, and witty writing makes complex legal theories understandable and relevant, highlighting how the Constitution can and should be a tool for advancing democracy and justice. This is a must-read for anyone interested in the future of law and equity in America. A truly enlightening and transformative work, perfect for both legal minds and casual readers (like me) alike.
November 10, 2024
"Fatalism is much like originalism: both tell us not to dream bigger and that we can have no better. Both keep us from achieving a functioning democracy. Both lie. The truth is, we can choose to interpret the Constitution so that is serves all of us–guided by the Reconstruction Amendments' revolutionary purpose and their expansive conceptions of liberation and egalitarianism. Rejecting the extremism of originalist ideology is a step toward taking back the Constitution. And taking back the Constitution is a step toward the inclusive and equitable democracy we deserve."
June 24, 2024
Current, engaged, relatively easy to get through, and, most impressionably for me, constructively critical!
(Funny too at times: “The originalist ideology’s claim to singular objectivity and legal legitimacy is fascinating, because the Venn diagram between the results originalism produces and conservative policy preferences is a circle—they completely overlap”; my favourite of many lines that elicited cackling I can shamefully only describe as maniacal)
(Funny too at times: “The originalist ideology’s claim to singular objectivity and legal legitimacy is fascinating, because the Venn diagram between the results originalism produces and conservative policy preferences is a circle—they completely overlap”; my favourite of many lines that elicited cackling I can shamefully only describe as maniacal)
December 15, 2024
Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer but I AM a policy wonk and recovering SCOTUS groupie, so this book is right up my alley - phenomenal legal analysis but (I think at least) still accessible to non-lawyers with fantasticly laid-out alternative approaches to analysis and tangible things ordinary citizens can do to take our power back (because in a true democracy, the power lies with We the People- yes, ALL the people)
August 5, 2025
A very helpful book that speaks to the reader's conscience. Why do we honor old documents above our shared lives? The documents purport to facilitate the good life, but when they clearly don't, why don't we just come up with other interpretive fixations beyond what the documents originally meant? Wrote up some ideas on Medium.
Read
October 10, 2024Fantastic overview of how so-called originalist interpretation of the constitution is an egregious theft of our rights and liberty. The writing is very approachable and the last chapter includes specific actions we can all take to make the US better for all. Pair with the 5-4 podcast for a more thorough understanding of why the supreme court sucks.
October 14, 2024
Everyone should read this (or listen to the audiobook read by the author!) but lawyers must read this. An absolute articulation of what many of us feel about how courts have betrayed this country. This excellent book is accessible to anyone, but a particular call to arms to those of working in the law
May 4, 2024
READ THIS BOOK ! With her incisive analysis, humor, and hope (yes, hope!), Madiba Dennie is our jurisprudential Dorothy pulling back the curtain on "originalism"and exposing the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of its adherents. Aptly titled, this book is not just for legal scholars but all of us yearning for a government and legal system that takes "We the People" seriously.
June 18, 2024
This is a great read. Clearly written and argued. Dennie provides a strong rebuke of originalism and offers a creative and justice-oriented alternative: inclusive constitutionalism. Highly recommend this book.
July 1, 2024
5 ⭐️ I had the honor of listening to Madiba speak at an event, and I’m so grateful that her work was highlighted. She is a voice of hope and accessibility in a time when both are hard to find in law.
July 4, 2024
What an exceptional and approachable book. Dennie masterfully takes our current legal problem and lays out a roadmap out of the hell the Supreme Court and the Federalist Society put us in. An incredibly approachable read. I have a little more hope in the world.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 46 reviews