Debating Predictability and Stability in Legal Interpretation

The discussion highlights the importance of predictability and stability in legal interpretation, emphasizing the necessity for principles that enable individuals to organize their lives around consistent legal standards. The critique of originalism lies in the need for predictability to prevent cherry-picking outcomes based on subjective principles. It underlines the significance of stare decisis and precedent to ensure consistency even as judges change. The conversation advocates for a theory that offers constraint, predictability, and meaningful interpretation beyond fossilized history like originalism, pointing out the failure of progressives in promoting predictability and constraint which has inadvertently allowed originalism to appear principled despite flaws.