Originalism (Scalia/Gorsuch strand)
textualism & original public meaning, 1986–present

The originalism framework — Constitution interpreted according to its original public meaning, with judicial neutrality as a methodological commitment — became the dominant conservative legal-philosophy tradition after Scalia's appointment in 1986 and was institutionalized through Federalist Society legal scholarship and the modern judicial nomination process. On substantive doctrine, Paxton wins points: Second Amendment maximalism per Heller, religious-exercise expansion per the modern free-exercise cases, abortion per Dobbs, federalism per the New Federalism cases. But the textualist commitment to *rules over standards*, neutral application, and process integrity is in genuine tension with Paxton's documented forum-shopping practices, which treat the legal process as a means to predetermined outcomes — exactly what the Scalia framework's commitment to neutral methodology was built to oppose. Talarico's framework wins on procedural integrity, anti-corruption, and the institutionalist commitment to neutral application of legal rules; he loses on substantive doctrinal positions across most cultural and Second Amendment issues. The tie is informative: applied honestly, originalism credits Paxton's substantive positions while flagging his process record as the precise institutional decay textualism was built to prevent.