Stanford Law Scholar Reframes Constitutional Scholarship

Jud Campbell's research challenges common assumptions about the founders' views on rights and the Constitution's origins.

Published on Feb. 25, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

Jud Campbell, a professor at Stanford Law School, is leading a growing movement within legal scholarship that is reframing how we understand the U.S. Constitution. His research delves into the historical context of the founding era, revealing a more nuanced understanding of rights than commonly assumed. Campbell argues the founders' views on rights and the Constitution's origins differ significantly from modern interpretations, complicating both originalist and progressive constitutional approaches.

Why it matters

Campbell's work is not about overturning established law, but rather altering how we understand the Constitution's origins and its application today. His research uncovers forgotten nuances in founding-era thought, such as the distinction between legislative and executive restrictions on free speech, which may have relevance for the current political climate and the expansion of executive authority.

The details

Campbell's research challenges the assumption that the Constitution is a settled document, arguing the founders didn't necessarily share our modern conceptions of rights. He says they often invoked natural, customary, or common-law rights in different contexts, and misinterpreting which tradition they were using can lead to significant misunderstandings of their intent. Campbell also highlights the erosion of what he calls the founders' 'sense of constitutional responsibility,' where citizens and politicians alike understood and valued the Constitution's underlying principles.

  • In early 2025, Jud Campbell was awarded the Federalist Society's Joseph Story Award for his significant contributions to constitutional scholarship.

The players

Jud Campbell

A professor at Stanford Law School who is leading a growing movement within legal scholarship that is reframing how we understand the U.S. Constitution.

Jonathan Gienapp

A professor at Stanford Law School who is collaborating with Jud Campbell on research exploring the continuities between British and American constitutional thought in the late 18th century.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“I don't see my work as necessarily pointing in a liberal or conservative direction. I'm trying to understand how people thought in the past, how they understood rights, who got to enforce them, and how they limited governmental power.”

— Jud Campbell, Professor, Stanford Law School (newsy-today.com)

“I love helping students think through different ways of approaching the law. I try to acquire them to step into the shoes of people they disagree with. Understanding competing perspectives is how real progress happens.”

— Jud Campbell, Professor, Stanford Law School (newsy-today.com)

What’s next

Campbell is currently collaborating with Professor Jonathan Gienapp at Stanford Law, exploring the continuities between British and American constitutional thought in the late 18th century. Their joint work aims to illuminate how early Americans understood the origins of fundamental law and who held the authority to enforce it.

The takeaway

Jud Campbell's research challenges the common assumption that the U.S. Constitution is a settled document, revealing a more nuanced understanding of rights and the founders' views that differs significantly from modern interpretations. This work complicates both originalist and progressive constitutional approaches, and highlights the erosion of the founders' 'sense of constitutional responsibility' in today's political climate.