Interpretive methods that privilege text and history in understanding constitutional provisions have long been associated—at least in the media and the popular imagination—with conservatives. But questioning by the more progressive justices at oral argument in several high-profile cases demonstrates that use of these methodologies is not cabined to the Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority. What does it mean to be a progressive text-and-history legal organization? How can text and history be used to advance progressive interests? What is the proper use of history to illuminate constitutional meaning? How do progressive advocates use history from prior eras without reinforcing prior societal inequities? And what role, if any, can historical materials appropriately play in understanding statutory provisions?

These questions—along with audience questions—will be fielded by a panel of lawyers from the Constitutional Accountability Center (CAC).

Panelists:

Elizabeth Wydra, President
Brianne Gorod, Chief Counsel
David Gans, Director of the Program on Human Rights, Civil Rights, and Citizenship
Alexis Hoag-Fordjour, Scholar-in-Residence
Praveen Fernandes, Vice President (Moderator)