Skip to main content

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

Comment Preferences

  •  The Other Side (none)
    The intent of those writing this is one side of the equation. The other side is that people are coming of age all the time. What is their part in the process? How to their votes get counted?

    The interpretation needs to change over time simply because the people it affects weren't born at the time certain parts of the document were generated.

    I'm concerned with "agreement". How do you agree to something that happens before you are alive? Even those who take no active part in the process that happens when they are alive (such as a vote taken by the legislature of their state in ratifying an amendment) have the theoretical opportunity to participate in some form. But those who are born after the matter is settled don't have even a theoretical option to participate.

    A theory which says that the meaning is set in concrete at the time the section is adopted ignores the fact that time marches on and new people become citizens with that time.

    Just on that grounds alone, it is suspect.

    Liberal Thinking

    Think, liberally.

    by Liberal Thinking on Sat Jul 23, 2005 at 07:06:52 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site