The essay explores how the debate on constitutional interpretation evolved in the four years of Trump Presidency thanks to the contribution of Justices appointed
by the outgoing President. To this end, the essay addresses Justices’ arguments, with a view to detect their stance on constitutional interpretation within the broader context of the Court’s debate on the matter. The Author argues that the newly appointed Justices’ views on constitutional interpretation impacts especially on two issues that are far from being settled within the Court: a) the relationship between originalism and textualism and b) the interplay between theories of constitutional interpretation and the principle of stare decisis in constitutional case law.