English and American legal history. He earned his undergraduate degree, summa cum laude, in history from Harvard University, and his law degree from Yale Law School, where he was an Articles Editor of The Yale Law Journal and Executive Editor of The Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities. After law school, he served as a law clerk to Judge Michael Daly Hawkins of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and was a commercial litigator at Covington & Burling in Washington, DC.
Larson applied the “Page 99 Test” to his latest book, One Nation Under Law: The Meaning of the Declaration of Independence, and reported the following:
From page 99 (the introduction to Chapter Six):Visit Carlton F. W. Larson's website.The view that the Declaration of Independence created an American nation isn’t just supported by the document’s text and history; it is also supported by how the Declaration has endured in legal, political, and cultural memory. If the Declaration created thirteen independent nations, then courts, legal analysts, political figures, and the American public have been getting it wrong for a very long time. The one-nation view is amply supported by judicial decisions that have carefully considered the issue, by the public statements of some of the leading lawyers of the nineteenth century—Joseph Story, Daniel Webster, and Abraham Lincoln, and by the long tradition of celebrating the Fourth of July as the birthday of the American nation.This excerpt provides a decent representation of the book. It is part of my larger argument in Part Two that the Declaration of Independence created an American nation, in which the states were confederated together under an unwritten constitution and presented themselves as one nation to the rest of the world. Chapter Four addresses the textual arguments in support of this position, and Chapter Five considers the history between 1775 and 1787. Chapter Six, which is entitled “Memory,” turns to how the Declaration was viewed in later periods, with the primary emphasis on the 1790s and the early nineteenth century.
It is also reflective of the book’s overall prose style. Even though the book contains a fair amount of legal material, I wanted it to be accessible to non-lawyers, so I sought to avoid jargon and technicalities. My hope is that any reader can pick up the book and easily follow its arguments.
The excerpt, which is drawn from Part Two on nationhood, is less reflective of other parts of the book. Part One addresses the text, authorship, and legal status of the Declaration. Part Three turns to the Declaration’s commitment to the rule of law and constitutional structure, and Part Four considers how courts have treated the Declaration’s language about liberty and equality. Readers seeking to learn more about those issues would be better served by a page from one of those parts.
The Page 99 Test: The Trials of Allegiance.
--Marshal Zeringue









