According to Critical Legal Studies, words in legal texts function as mechanisms of oppression.

The 17th Amendment – permitting the direct popular election of Senators – strengthened structural federalism.

Assessed through Christian principles, the War for Independence comprised a just and legally defensible cause.

In dividing federal executive and legislative power, the Framers drew upon classical notions of the One, the Few, and the Many.

Originalism, as an interpretive methodology, in inapposite to the jurisprudence of legal positivism.

Justice Scalia’s application of textualism presupposes legal positivism.

Originalism is an interpretive methodology used because it produces results that are politically conservative.

In interpretating “necessary,” Chief Justice Marshall in McCulloch v. Maryland used “strict construction” Originalism.

Assume an American jurist adheres to natural law theory and further assume the jurist has before the court a validly enacted criminal statute that mandates the death penalty to be applied to duly convicted persons who violate parking regulations.  In a post-conviction, pre-sentencing ruling, this jurist may: 

Critical Theory comports and aligns with the Christian worldview.