Skip to main content

View Diary: On Constitutional Interpretation: Originalism v. A Living Constitution? (286 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  A Random Thought (none)
    Constitutional interpretation is not unlike Bible interpretation.  You can't take the language of either absolutely literally; both require application of principles to a text.  

    It is interesting to me that Scalia and Thomas -- both religiously fundamentalist (with deliberate lower case "f")-- seem to adopt a neo strict constructionist or originalist interpretation to their fundamentalist spiritual beliefs as well as to their Constitutional interpretation.  What's more, both  are inherently intellectually dishonest because they require the reader to pick and choose the controlling text and hence the meaning they will ascribe to it.  

    When you are going thru hell, keep going! Winston Churchill

    by flo58 on Sat Jul 23, 2005 at 02:19:04 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (153)
  • Community (68)
  • Elections (34)
  • Media (33)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (31)
  • Law (30)
  • Environment (30)
  • Civil Rights (29)
  • Culture (29)
  • 2016 (29)
  • Science (25)
  • Barack Obama (25)
  • Hillary Clinton (24)
  • Labor (23)
  • Republicans (23)
  • Climate Change (23)
  • Economy (21)
  • Josh Duggar (19)
  • Marriage Equality (19)
  • Jeb Bush (18)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site