ipl-logo

Pros And Cons Of Living Constitutionalism

992 Words4 Pages

Living Constitutionalist claim that the constitution is a living and breathing document that is constantly evolving to our society. There have been Supreme Court cases where judges have held not to the Constitution’s original intent, otherwise known as origionalism, but to a living Constitutionalist view. Whereas, contemporary views often contain a progressive view, former President George Washington holds to an origionalist view in his Farewell Address, warning against wrong international worldviews and progressivism.
A Constitution is a construct to which a nation can survive and thrive. The founders of the U.S. Constitution made strict constructs that would prevent from tyranny and promote liberty within the bounds of morality. Former President …show more content…

In Troph v. Dulles (1958) Chief Justice Warren wrote that the eight amendment is evolving. A living Constitution seems harmless for it is merely adapting to culture, but in reality it is removing the rock solid foundation of our nation with sand that cannot withhold a storm. For example, truth is becoming subjective to where anyone can take a part of the Constitution and twist its interpretation, but instead of being a Constitution, it is merely acting as an opinion piece. Many living Constitutionalist attempt to justify their stance by stating that the Constitution was for slavery, but Scalia responds well against their justification in his writing Originalism: The Lesser Evil. Living …show more content…

He constantly spoke to protect the nation from tyranny, yet his words ring strong for the modern American to hear. The modern American has been misled by public opinion and been seduced by moral subjectivity and relativism that stems from Darwinist and Marxist views. Instead of infiltrating their views with a moral mindset, many have embraced his view with an open mind so much that they have lost their mind. For example, it is now being taught in public schools that humans have evolved from apes based on scientific experiments. For something to be scientifically proven, it must be tested over and over again. No one has ever tested an ape evolving into a different species. Solely it has been proven for evolution within a species, micro evolution. An ape evolving into a human is merely a scientific assumption, not scientifically proven. Thus, now the United States are being led by blind men claiming to have full knowledge. Can the United States go on with this sort of illogical syllogism? The resolve to the nation’s years of straying is simple, to heed the wisdom of former President Washington, and come back to the basic of objective truth that will govern the nation

Show More
Related
1167 Words | 5 Pages

A constitution, by any definition, is a set of guide lines put in place for the citizens and governments of a country. The United States Constitution provides the basic rules and principles of how the country is managed. Without any sort of constitution United States citizens would be in an utter state of complete chaos due to a lack of government. With its new interpretations, and constant state of change, this “living document” was, and continues to be, an essential part of our countries founding. One article tells of the detailed hardships our Founding Fathers endured while creating such an important document.

Read More
688 Words | 3 Pages

One of Scalia's first arguments in favor of the enduring Constitution claims that the document already has a means of changing without having to interpret it in a different way. The amendment process presents a way to alter the Constitution to remain compatible with modern American society without having to pretend that the words the founders wrote two hundred years ago mean something they do not. The issue with this school of thought lies with the fact that passing an amendment is an incredibly demanding process. It requires an astounding amount of cooperation from Congress, the Senate and the President. Creating an amendment for every last minute alteration to the Constitution would be unreasonably time consuming and

Read More
831 Words | 4 Pages

The constitution is the foundation of the US government. Why? The answer is simple. Without it we would have no government. As you know the constitution was drafted in 1787 in Philadelphia.

Read More
762 Words | 4 Pages

A constitution is the fundamental law by which a nation or a state is governed and organized. It establishes the framework of government, delegates the powers and duties of governmental bodies, and defines the relationship between the government and their citizens. Texas current constitution was adopted in 1876, and since then Texas voters have approved more than 467 amendments to this document. The word “amendment” is defined as the act or process of changing the words or the meaning of a law or document (constitution). Throughout this essay I will explain the rules for amending the Texas Constitution, the attempts made at constitutional reforms during the 1970s, explain why constitutional reforms were attempted and why it ultimately failed.

Read More
65 Words | 1 Pages

I disagree that the “Living Constitution” will destroy it because society changes and the laws that govern it need to change also. I think that Scalia was stuck in an outdated mindset of viewing the constitution. I agree with you that Breyer 's argument was the better of the two, and I agree that the interpretation of the constitution should be flexible and not be fixed.

Read More
1221 Words | 5 Pages

When hearing George Washington’s Farewell Address for the first time it is easy to understand it is well written and the substance is things he really felt is important. However once the time is spent relating his speech to todays times and problems the magnitude of his word is really understood. Almost 250 years later and 44 more presidents, George Washington’s thoughts still apply perfectly to the current state of the U.S. So much has change sense he gave this address but unity, Stoping the divide of political parties, morality, and avoiding entangling

Read More
562 Words | 3 Pages

The elements of the "Founder's Toolbox" and the ideals of John Locke and James Harrington were some of major intellectual influences that led to the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. The Founders based the structure, participation, and leadership of their government on writings from Harrington and included them in the Constitution. The moral sense from Locke provided a good base for the law of the United States government and was included in the Bill of Rights. These principles helped model the system of government we enjoy today.

Read More
451 Words | 2 Pages

To the highly-valued citizens of the United States of American, we believe in order for our newly-founded country to thrive, our constitution, the Articles of Confederation, and the system of government which it has formed must be replaced and a new constitution be adopted. We believe the Articles of Confederation have proven to be ineffective and the source of many hardships in our nation. To strive to solve this significant challenge, we have created and propose a new constitution, the Constitution of the United States, and federal government. As an explanation for our reasoning, this pamphlet has been written to clarify the Articles of Confederation’s weaknesses, how the new constitution can fix these problems, and present how the Constitution

Read More
1106 Words | 5 Pages

The Constitution—the foundation of the American government—has been quintessential for the lives of the American people for over 200 years. Without this document America today would not have basic human rights, such as those stated in the Bill of Rights, which includes freedom of speech and religion. To some, the Constitution was an embodiment of the American Revolution, yet others believe that it was a betrayal of the Revolution. I personally believe that the Constitution did betray the Revolution because it did not live up to the ideals of the Revolution, and the views of the Anti-Federalists most closely embodied the “Spirit of ‘76.” During the midst of the American Revolution, authors and politicians of important documents, pamphlets, and slogans spread the basis for Revolutionary ideals and defined what is known as the “Spirit of ‘76”.

Read More
1324 Words | 6 Pages

Does that mean people have the right to own a revolver or pistol, or does it mean they can own weapons as extreme as AK-47s, bazookas or grenades? If the framers were drafting the document today, each article and amendment would need to be much lengthier in order to specify what is constitutional and what is not. Marshall said he, “…plan[s] to celebrate the bicentennial of the Constitution as a living document” and that “The true miracle was not the birth of the Constitution, but it’s life” (Marshall). In this sense, Marshall points out that the original Constitution was indeed sensationalized by people over the years. The ideas in it were really nothing new, but rather just indefinite declarations.

Read More
601 Words | 3 Pages

The U.S. Constitution is a Living Document Since society has changed dramatically between the eighteenth and twenty first century, the U.S Constitution should be considered as a living document because it is not applicable in today's society and therefore in need of some changes in order to fit into today’s society. When our founding fathers wrote the constitution they did not have in mind all the technological advancements the U.S. will one day have. Such as the internet, television, radio, and so on. Other’s will say that if the constitution was considered a living document then judges will take advantage and manipulate the constitution to their benefit, but they don’t realize that people already manipulate the constitution. There were laws that contradicted the constitution like the Judiciary Act of 1789, which contradicts Article III of the Constitution in the Marbury v. Madison case.

Read More
516 Words | 3 Pages

Lesson 2: How Does Government Secure Natural Rights? How would you explain the difference between a limited government and an unlimited government? Do you think this difference is important? Why/why not?

Read More
960 Words | 4 Pages

My Judicial Philosophy: Minimal Extrapolation Non-Originalism The two main prevailing legal philosophies when it comes to constitutional interpretation are originalism and non-originalism. Originalists believe in interpreting the constitution based directly on the framers’ intent when writing it and other Amendments while non-originalists view the Constitution in the context of the time it is applied, referring back to the spirit of the framers’ intent, not the intent itself. Both these ideologies alone are seriously flawed and no one would ever argue that historical intent alone or modern context and consequences alone would lead to smart legal opinions. The intent of the Second Amendment, for example, was derived from the Lockean ideals

Read More
1367 Words | 6 Pages

The constitution of the United States is an insightful and revolutionary idea of how a government should be practiced in order to prevent a greedy, corrupt form of government from establishing and taking over its people. The US government is founded on the principle that it works for its people, meaning that whatever is legislated is meant only for the benefit of the American people. However, the Constitution is at this point flawed due to the fact that many of its proclamations are vague and outdated, and has to be left to interpretation as to what the framers truly intended of it. This is dangerous because it further divides the nation when Americans believe in different forms of what is constitutionally righteous, and this may start a civil

Read More
785 Words | 4 Pages

The friendship Washington establishes with the people of America serve as a reason for the audience to listen to his speech and take note of the topics and ideas he presents. In addition to the plain folks appeal, Washington also repeats words and phrases to give a larger effect to his address. When advising his audience on the importance of a strong, unified government, Washington claims such a government is a necessity to keep the American values of “your real independence,” “your tranquility at home,” “your peace abroad,” “your safety,” “your prosperity,” and “that very liberty which you so highly prize” (3).

Read More

More about Pros And Cons Of Living Constitutionalism

Related Topics

Open Document