IN THE 79TH OF THE FEDERALIST PAPERS,HAMILTON,ARGUING FOR NON-DIMINUTION OF JUDICIAL SALARIES, NOTES "IN A REPUBLIC WHERE FORTUNES ARE NOT AFFLUENT AND PENSIONS NOT EXPEDIENT...." TENURE AND GUARANTEED SALARIES ARE INDISPENSABLE.WE OF COURSE PROVIDE GENEROUS PENSIONS FOR JUDGES.IS HAMILTON USING THE WORD DIFFERENTLY HERE,OR IS THE SOMETHING AT WAR WITH THE ORIGINAL INTENT IN THE CREATION OF A JUDICIAL PENSION SYSTEM? 2.IN THE 81ST PAPER,HAMILTON DENIES THAT THE COURTS ARE EMPOWERED TO INVALIDATE LEGISLATIVE ACTS BECAUSE THEY ARE REPUGNANT TO THE SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. STARTING WITH McCULLOCH AND AT LEAST THROUGH O'CONNOR's DISSENT IN NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES (AND BY KENNEDY TOO IN A RECENT CASE IF MEMORY SERVES)THE COURT HAS SPOKEN APPROVINGLY OF THE SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION AS AN INTERPRETIVE TOOL.CAN ANY OF THIS BE JIBED WITH A THEORY OF ORIGINALISM? MARC STERN
