The Mythic Underpinnings of Originalism: A Rhetorical and Legal Analysis
Originalism, despite its presentation as a neutral legal methodology, functions as a mythic narrative rooted in American exceptionalism and reverence for the founding era. While contemporary legal and political conditions differ radically from those of the 18th century, originalist jurists insist on interpreting the Constitution according to the presumed intentions or public meanings of the Framers. I argue that such insistence is best understood not through legal hermeneutics but through the lens of myth. Drawing on narrative and mythic criticism, I demonstrate how originalism sacralizes the Constitution, elevates the founders to heroic status, and resists historical evolution in favor of imagined timeless truths. Through close readings of key Supreme Court decisions—Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, District of Columbia v. Heller, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, and Kennedy v. Bremerton School District—I show how originalist rhetoric transforms judicial interpretation into ritual performance and mythic restoration. This analysis provides a critical framework for understanding originalism’s enduring power in American legal and political discourse.
Judicial Politics, Jurisprudence, Legal Rhetoric, Myth, Narrative, Originalism
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations