The Invisible Constitution in Comparative Perspective

Premise One: “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two 

Senators from each State.”

Premise Two: Alaska is a state.

Conclusion: Therefore the Senate of the United States shall include two 

Senators from Alaska.

The text of the Constitution does not mention Alaska, but from what the text 

does say, and from the true factual premise that Alaska is a state, we can imply 

that Alaska is entitled to two Senators.

39

What is clear is that originalism should endorse constitutional implication 

as a general method of constitutional construction. Constitutional implica-

tions are not in the text, but they follow from the text.

3.6.2.  Four Forms of Contextual Enrichment

What about contextual enrichment? The mechanisms of contextual enrich-

ment are intuitively accessible to competent language users, but these mech-

anisms are described by a technical vocabulary in the philosophy of language 

and linguistics. Consider four forms of contextual enrichment.

38 

I am treating “implication” as an agglomeration term when it is used in its broadest sense. See 

note 31.

39 

This account of constitutional implication is not quite right. The first premise is a quote from 

the text of Article I and the Seventeenth Amendment. Premise two is a fact. The conclusion 

is a rule of law. Strictly speaking, the argument needs an additional step or two – which move 

from the text to the communicative content and then to the associated legal content. We can 

easily imagine an expanded version of the syllogism that fills in the missing steps.

---

 

Originalism and the Invisible Constitution 

87

3.6.2.1. Implicature

Implicature conveys communicative content that differs from the semantic 

content of an utterance or text.

40

 Consider the classic example of a letter 

of recommendation, written by a law professor, for a student applying for a 

prestigious judicial clerkship. The entire body of the letter reads as follows:  

“I recommend Ben. He was always on time to class and his attendance record 

was perfect.” The semantic content of the letter consists of a speech act, rec-

ommendation, and two supporting statements regarding punctuality and reg-

ularity of attendance. But in the context in which the letter was written, much 

more than the literal meaning is communicated. If the best that can be said 

about Ben is that he was on time and did not miss class, the implicature is that 

Ben is not suitable for the position of judicial clerk.

3.6.2.2. Impliciture

Impliciture involves situations in which what is said implicitly includes some-

thing else that is closely related.

41

 Kent Bach gives the following examples, in 

which the impliciture (unstated) has been added in brackets:

•  Jack and Jill are married [to each other].

•  Bill insulted his boss and [as a result] got fired.

•  Nina has had enough [pasta to eat].

42

Thus, if someone says, “Jack and Jill are married,” the [to each other] is unstated 

but implicit, and so forth for the other examples. Constitutional impliciture is 

common: Article I, Section 9, of the Constitution explicitly states, “[n]o Bill 

of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed,” with [by Congress] as an 

impliciture. Obviously, the provision does include implicitures such as [by the 

Parliament of the United Kingdom] or [by the legislature of any nation]. The 

particular impliciture is derived from the context.

40 

See Wayne Davis, “Implicature,” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (last revised September 

22, 2010) 

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/implicature/

.

41 

Kent Bach, “Conversational Impliciture” (1994) 9 Mind and Language 124.

42 

Kent Bach, “Impliciture vs. Explicature: What’s the Difference?” user 

www.sfsu.edu/kbach/

Bach.ImplExpl.pdf

.

---

88