I know what Scalia means, but part of me couldn’t help but think
there was a little irony in the Justice’s recent pronouncement: “[The
Constiution’s] not a living document. It’s dead, dead, dead!” Speaking
to a group at Southern Methodist University, Scalia was promoting what
he considers a “strict constructionist” interpretation of the Constitution.
The debate on how to interpret the Constitution is older than the Constitution.Most of the Founding Fathers were strict constructionists (as you would imagine… since they drafted the document. Of course they wanted it interpreted as it was written). Over time, as high technology and low morals altered the nature of American society and politics, the question started to arise more and more: “Isn’t this document a little outdated? But rather than re-write it, why not just interpret it freshly for our modern circumstances?” Which basically meant, “Why not just ignore the clear intent of the Founding Fathers and just draw from the Constitution whatever we want it to say…”
No comments:
Post a Comment