Lael K. Weis’ article “Originalism and Constitutional Amendment” explores the compatibility between originalism and constitutional amendment. The author argues that while originalism is primarily concerned with interpreting the original meaning of constitutional text, it can also be used to guide the interpretation of the constitutional amendment process. Specifically, the author argues that originalism supports a narrow view of the amendment power, which requires adherence to the original meaning of the amendment clause.

The author supports this argument by examining the text and history of the Constitution, as well as the writings of prominent originalist scholars such as Robert Bork and Antonin Scalia. The article then examines the implications of this originalist view of the amendment power for various contemporary debates about constitutional interpretation and amendment, such as the question of whether the Equal Rights Amendment can still be ratified.

Overall, Weis concludes that originalism and the amendment power are not incompatible, but rather that originalism can help to clarify the meaning and scope of the amendment power. However, the article also notes that originalism cannot provide definitive answers to all questions of constitutional interpretation and amendment, and that other sources of constitutional law, such as precedent and evolving social norms, must also be taken into account.

Weis, Lael K. “Originalism and Constitutional Amendment.” Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 34, no. 2 (2011): 565-86.