Abstract
Excerpted From: Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights and Social Justice Symposium, Conservative Caution v. Progressive Originalism: How Justices Barrett and Jackson Are Paving Their Own Paths on the Court, 31 Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice 607 (Spring, 2025) (Full Document)
MS. PERARIA: Good morning, everybody. My name is Hope Peraria, and I am the Editor-in-Chief of the Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights and Social Justice. Formerly the Cardozo Journal of Law and Gender, our Journal now features intersectional analyses of a broad range of topics related to anti-racism, human rights, international law, immigration, civil rights, family law, criminal law, environmental justice, and more.
Right now, much of the scholarship and litigation on individual rights and separation of powers is grappling with the Court's originalist turn and the different approaches of each Justice. Notably, the Court's newest Justices, Barrett and Jackson, have been differentiating themselves from their respective conservative and liberal blocs.
Our advisor, Professor Rudenstine, suggested this symposium topic after the Court passed down its June 2024 decision, which featured surprising opinions by each Justice. The topic was inspired by the 1991 symposium that Professor Rudenstine organized shortly after Justice Scalia joined the Court and it became clear that his jurisprudence would be influential.
Today, we are excited to take an in-depth look at Justice Barrett's willingness to side with the liberal justices and her “workable” model of originalism, and Justice Jackson's independence and take on progressive originalism. And we have three panels in which we will do so.
The first panel will focus on the Justices' take on presidential immunity, and the second on their opinions on firearms. The final panel will discuss their ideologies more broadly and their beliefs about judicial decision-making.
We are really excited for the powerhouses of constitutional scholarship that we have assembled today to cover these issues. We are grateful to have you join us today and learn from your expertise.
[. . .]
MS. COHEN: We would like to thank the moderators and panelists for your incredible insights today. Additionally, we really appreciate the time and energy dedicated by everyone who helped us make this symposium possible. We would also like to thank our Junior Symposium Editors, Serena Roche, Daisy Elliot, and Hannah Cohen, for all their hard work curating, organizing, and helping us run the event today. We hope this has been an encouraging, engaging, and thought-provoking conversation on the different jurisprudence of Justices Barrett and Jackson.
As a reminder, if you have registered to receive CLE credits, please see Emily Abrams, she's seated in the back, to receive your certificate. Lastly, thank you all for coming, and we hope you have a great weekend.
