The extent to which conservative judges continue to insist that everything we need to know about federal remedies at the Founding can be divined from statutes Congress enacted, without *any* regard for what the common law provided, is ... exasperating:

http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/18/18-30684.0.pdf

For habeas, just like for damages against federal officers, the principal remedies in pre-Civil War courts were fashioned by judges under state (or general) common law—and most widely available in state court. Ignoring that history is ... not originalism:

http://www.californialawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/8-Vladeck-final.pdf

The best thing I've ever written was about how this *exact* analytical move is not only inconsistent with Founding-era understandings of *American* law, but it's also based upon long-since-debunked Whig histories of what was true in England at that time:

https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/vol124_vladeck.pdf