American Constitution Society

Skip to content



Constitutional Interpretation and Change

Ideological conservatives have been quite successful in promoting neutral-sounding theories of constitutional interpretation, such as originalism and strict construction, and in criticizing judges with whom they disagree as judicial activists who make up law instead of interpreting it. The Constitutional Interpretation and Change Issue Group works to debunk the neutrality of those theories and expose misleading criticisms. It also articulates effective and accessible methods of interpretation to give full meaning to the guarantees contained in the Constitution.

The Issue Group's Co-Chairs are:


To get involved in the work of the Constitutional Interpretation and Change Issue Group, please fill out the Issue Group Sign-Up Form.

Also, please note that ACS ResearchLink features a number of topics related to the Constitutional Interpretation and Change Issue Group’s work on which law students are encouraged to focus their academic scholarship.
Recent Stories

The Summer of 1787: The Men Who Invented the Constitution

With David O. Stewart, author of The Summer of 1787; Of Counsel, Ropes & Gray LLP, and

Paul M. Smith, Partner, Jenner & Block LLP; Chair of the National Board of the American Constitution Society

On April 28, the American Constitution Society will host a book signing and discussion on the founding of our Constitution with David O. Stewart, author of The Summer of 1787: The Men Who Invented the Constitution and Paul M. Smith. Mr. Stewart and Mr. Smith, both distinguished litigators, will discuss the personalities that drafted our founding document, the compromises and confrontations that led to its key provisions and how these provisions continue to shape our democracy today.

"Mr. Stewart has done a nimble job of retelling a familiar story, showing how the Constitution evolved during those hot summer months in Philadelphia, while conjuring the atmosphere of the convention and creating vivid portraits of its chief delegates."

- Michiko Kakutani, The New York Times

'District of Columbia v. Heller': The Advocates Speak

On March 18, 2008, ACS hosted an argument night panel featuring leading advocates and amici in the case District of Columbia v. Heller, which concerns the constitutionality of the District's ban on the private possession of handguns. Panelists discussed the key issues in the case in light of the argument in the U.S. Supreme Court earlier that day.

The panel featured:

  • Victor A. Bolden, General Counsel, NAACP Legal Defense Fund
  • Thomas C. Goldstein, Partner, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP
  • Irv Gornstein, Of Counsel, O'Melveny & Myers LLP
  • Matthew M. Shors, Partner, O'Melveny & Myers LLP
  • Moderator, Amanda Frost, Assistant Professor of Law, American University Washington College of Law

  • Tuesday, March 18, 2008
    6 - 8 p.m.
    O'Melveny & Myers LLP
    1625 Eye Street, NW
    Washington, DC 20006

    The Second Amendment in the Supreme Court

    On March 13, ACS hosted a press briefing on the Supreme Court case, District of Columbia v. Heller, which concerns the constitutionality of the District of Columbia’s ban on the private possession of handguns. Experts from a variety of perspectives discussed whether the Second Amendment protects only militia-related rights or the rights of private individuals, the appropriate standard for reviewing gun control legislation and the potential legal and policy implications of the first Court decision in this area in 68 years. The Supreme Court heard oral argument on this case on March 18, 2008.

    The panel featured:

  • Carl Bogus, Professor of Law, Roger Williams University School of Law
  • Dave Kopel, Research Director, Independence Institute
  • John Payton, Director-Counsel and President, NAACP Legal Defense Fund
  • Moderator, Dahlia Lithwick, Senior Editor, Slate

  • Thursday, March 13, 2008
    9:30 - 11 a.m.
    Zenger Room
    The National Press Club
    529 14th Street NW
    Washington, DC 20045

    More Stories