<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd">
  <responseDate>2026-06-03T00:59:06Z</responseDate>
  <request verb="GetRecord" identifier="oai:verfassungsblog.de/103157" metadataPrefix="oai_dc">https://verfassungsblog.de/oai/repository/</request>
  <GetRecord>
    <header>
      <identifier>oai:verfassungsblog.de/103157</identifier>
      <datestamp>2026-05-13T21:16:23Z</datestamp>
      <setSpec>posts</setSpec>
    </header>
    <metadata>
      <dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/ http://dublincore.org/schemas/xmls/simpledc20021212.xsd">
        <dc:identifier>http://dx.doi.org/10.59704/3152e5acb1f33cbf</dc:identifier>
        <dc:identifier>https://verfassungsblog.de/the-seduction-of-constitutional-anti-orthodoxy/</dc:identifier>
        <dc:title>The Seduction of Constitutional Anti-Orthodoxy</dc:title>
        <dc:creator>Hosie, Duncan</dc:creator>
        <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
        <dc:date>2026-05-13</dc:date>
        <dc:type>electronic resource</dc:type>
        <dc:format>text/html</dc:format>
        <dc:subject>ddc:342</dc:subject>
        <dc:subject>Neil Gorsuch</dc:subject>
        <dc:subject>Orthodoxy</dc:subject>
        <dc:subject>SCOTUS</dc:subject>
        <dc:subject>US constitution</dc:subject>
        <dc:subject>US Supreme Court</dc:subject>
        <dc:publisher>Verfassungsblog</dc:publisher>
        <dc:relation>Verfassungsblog--2366-7044</dc:relation>
        <dc:rights>CC BY-SA 4.0</dc:rights>
        <dc:description>American constitutional law treats “orthodoxy” as verboten. The concept has become a shorthand for the state imposition of belief that the First Amendment most centrally forbids. This anti-orthodoxy rhetoric is potent. It is also conceptually confused and increasingly destabilizing to contemporary First Amendment doctrine. This is especially acute in the undifferentiated and imprecise form it has assumed in cases like Chiles.</dc:description>
      </dc>
    </metadata>
  </GetRecord>
</OAI-PMH>
