Madison v. Marshall

The volume is therefore a very welcome and provocative contribution to the discussion over whether the founding generation favored a constitutional jurisprudence of 'original intent' or one based on the application of universal principles of justice. -- Philippa Strum, The City University of New York How should the U.S. Constitution be interpreted? Padula demonstrates that the two authorities at the time of the founding of the Republic, James Madison and John Marshall, could hardly agree whether the Constitution's meaning is fixed once and for all or remains subject to change in response to new developments. This learned and insightful book is a valuable resource for citizens as well as scholars. -- John Patrick Diggins, The City University of New York In Madison v. Marshall Guy Padula has written with great erudition and lucidity about two fundamental approaches to constitutional interpretation developed by the Founders. His book will stimulate new ways of thinking about 'originalist' interpretations and can help our own generation think through the questions of constitutional meaning and the role of the courts in shaping it. -- Richard M. Pious, Barnard College