ABSTRACT
Surprisingly little consensus exists on what constitutes an American tradition of conservative jurisprudence. This chapter explore the ways in which conservative jurisprudence is not just a single alternative to the liberal tradition in American political thought, but instead a rich tapestry of alternatives and different perspectives. It offers a typology based on related, but opposing commitments. The chapter focuses on how different conservative jurists understand their commitments, and how those different models of conservative jurisprudence relate to one another. The formal modern space corresponds with libertarianism. Much like textualism, libertarianism privileges formal concerns over substantive ones in advancing its agenda—in this case, that formal concern is with limiting the reach of political institutions. The substantive modern space corresponds with right-wing jurisprudence. Like libertarianism, right-wing jurisprudence is largely disinterested in historical context or changes.
