Pros And Cons Of The Us Constitution

A concerning number of citizens of the United States today consider the United States Constitution to be a relic. A memorial to aspirational thought we are to remember with fondness and adapt to our own changing societal needs. This is an unfortunate frame of mind, for this document was not merely a pleasant thought in the minds of U.S. Founders, but a brilliantly conceived legal document at significant personal cost to the men and women who developed it. It is a document that has the ability to withstand the test of time. The principles of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness were not something one would likely find as the foundation of any political doctrine until the United States Constitution was conceived in response to the lack

By returning our focus to the ideals the founders of the United States Constitution regarded, there are ways to go about limiting the power of the federal government. Foresight proved strength for the founders of our Constitution in providing a means to amend the constitution. As far as the thought behind the proper interpretation, the term Originalism encompasses many variations on thinking in terms of Constitutional interpretation but agrees that the document itself must be faithfully executed as it was intended at the time it was written, by the individual that invested so much personally and professionally to make this document possible. Though it is not a popular way of thinking these days, the constitution exists and maintains authority for the same reason it had authority in its conception. There is no change that has happened in America that merits changing of the United States Constitution or the idea that it should be held as a “living document”. To say this is simply to undermine the authority of the Constitution in the first place, thereby making it obsolete. Larry Simon explains where Originalism may get its

First, it might be claimed that it is implicit in the concept of a written constitution (or at least ours) that the original understanding provides the authoritative source of constitutional meaning, and that this meaning can be authoritatively changed only by amending the Constitution through the processes that are themselves set out in the document (Simon 1484)

The idea that something can get its authority simply by the fact that it was given that authority during its formulation and ratification should not be so negatively received by Americans. The fact that there is such opposition to authority only reinforces the fear that popular thought can be juvenile and easily become a breeding ground for discord and