Abstract
Originalist theories often fail to: (i) connect their justifications for constitutional legitimacy to their historical methodologies and (ii) explain how originalism is descriptively ‘our law’ despite its purpose as prescriptive law reform. The following Article deals with these theoretical defects by weaving together constitutional legitimacy and historical evidence under the common thread of text. Originalism thus emerges as a theory of anti-misconstruction, where ahistorical constructions have eroded the determinacy and consistency of the text, endangering the textual rights that legitimize the Constitution. Such descriptive misconstruction necessitates the prescriptive historical context of originalism to keep Constitutional constructions within the determinate bounds of original textual principles, protecting those rights that legitimize the Constitution.
Keywords
Originalism