In a piece for the Review of Politics, Justin Dyer reviews a new book by Lee J. Strang that promulgates an approach to originalism rooted in an appreciation for Aristotelean virtues and universal truths. Strang argues that the core purpose of the Constitution is to facilitate individual well-being and the common good. He opposes the "amoral legal positivism" of originalists such as Justice Antonin Scalia, which denies that natural law should influence adjudication. Instead, he contends that originalist judges should respect that the Constitution was designed to promote human flourishing when they perform their duties and administer justice. Dyer's assessment of the book is both concise and insightful.

"From the perspective of many originalists—Scalia included—natural law jurisprudence dangerously licenses judges to impose their own moral values on society while disregarding the jurisdictional limits of the judicial office. Friendly natural law critics of originalism, by contrast, allege that originalists have adopted the premises of amoral legal positivism and put themselves at odds with the original jurisprudence of the Constitution’s framers through their blithe neglect of natural justice."

"Originalism is justified by its ability to secure the common good and promote human well-being; indeed, it is 'the most normatively attractive theory of constitutional interpretation because it is the one most likely to secure the common good of American society and individual Americans’ human flourishing.' Empirically, Strang argues, originalism best explains our constitutional practice and the core features of our constitutional order, including reliance on precedent and the use of legal doctrine to guide judicial interpretation. Normatively, originalism best advances Americans’ flourishing and is therefore justified by its ability to realize the core purpose of the Constitution."

"In Strang’s account, natural law does far more work than merely providing a normative basis for the judges’ duty to follow the original meaning of the Constitution. Originalism is itself justified by the Constitution’s purpose to secure the common good and promote human flourishing, and natural law has a direct, albeit modest, role in constitutional interpretation, especially constitutional construction by the legislative branch. Strang’s normative case for the Constitution’s original meaning rests explicitly on an Aristotelian conception of human nature, basic human goods, and the virtues necessary for a well-lived life."

Read the full review here