On page 71 of his beautiful book The Classical Liberal Constitution, Richard A. Esptein acknowledges “how difficult it is to deal with systematic errors in [constitutional] interpretation that perforce creep into all interpretive efforts with the passage of time” (emphasis ours). Our question to Professor Epstein is this: What are the set of criteria for deciding which judicial precedents are in error and which are correct? How does one begin to test for “error” in an activity as subjective and aesthetic as constitutional interpretation? Is such a test even possible? Furthermore, how can our constitution be a “classical liberal constitution” if classical liberals don’t even exist anymore?

Where are all the classical liberals?