TY - JOUR
AU - Saker, Victoria A.
AB - 96 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL HISTORY Vol. XXXVII as interpretive tools but as absolute standards of political behavior. He categorizes votes and speeches in the Congress as wisdom or trivia based on how that speech or statement fits his own new-fashioned Procrustean bed. One reads that John A. Bingham of Ohio wanted "limited absolute equality" (p. 59) as did Senator Thaddeus Stevens of Pennsylvania and, in fact, the whole Joint Committee on Reconstruction (p. 96). Maltz further argues that "limited absolute equality" was "generally accepted" (p. 112) in the whole period and, in particular, by the writers of the amendments; he maintains that "to interpet it otherwise is to read into the Constitution ideas that were utterly foreign to their world view" (p. 158). Maltz also maintains that constitutional interpretation must be a "freeze­ frame" exercise. At one point, he states not only that his interpretation of the meaning of the privilegesand immunities clause of section one of the Fourteen Amendment would be the most narrow interpretation possible at that time but that all future interpretations were "fixed for all time in 1866." (p. 109). Maltz wants the reader to come away from the book believing that the 
TI - Federal Justice in California: The Court of Ogden Hoffman, 1851–1891 and Practicing Law in Frontier California
JF - American Journal of Legal History
DO - 10.2307/845774
DA - 1993-01-01
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/oxford-university-press/federal-justice-in-california-the-court-of-ogden-hoffman-1851-1891-and-NADhapMzX8
SP - 96
EP - 100
VL - 37
IS - 1
DP - DeepDyve
ER -