What do Albus Dumbledore and the original framers of the United States Constitution have in common? Besides their both having inspired a plethora of highly erotic fan fiction, not much — unless you ask hip Columbia Law School professor Michael Dorf. In his latest Find Law column, Dorf argues that J.K. Rowling's outing of Dumbledore over the weekend has little to no bearing on the Harry Potter novels, much in the same way that the founding fathers' original intentions shouldn't affect our interpretation of the Constitution.
It's an interesting read, even if it is totally head-scratching; in an impressive feat of legal reasoning, Dorf concludes: "The one thing the Court should not say … is that Dumbledore cannot marry a man in 2007 simply because same-sex marriage was not allowed in 1868, when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified." Which is our feeling exactly.
Harry Potter and the Framers' Intent [Find Law]