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 Convention on Racial Discrimination: What Does It Means for U.S. Policy?


ACS hosted a briefing examining the ongoing discussion about, and potential federal legislative implication of, United States compliance with an international agreement on racial discrimination. The agreement is known as the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD). Panelists at May 9, 2008 briefing, including experts who participated in the recent proceedings in Geneva, described CERD and the CERD compliance process, discuss the CERD Committee's findings and recommendations, and explored the role that Congress could play to address U.S. compliance with CERD.

'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
    Contact | Privacy Policy