Better Than Drudge

recent posts

about

Trashing the Constitution: The Living Document Con

By Selwyn Duke

Is constitutionalism akin to blind faith? Some statists certainly think so, as they have called the position “constitution-worship.” In light of this, what should we call those who lack that “faith”? Given that they don’t believe in the Constitution, and that the document is the supreme law of the land, can it be said that they don’t believe in law? Are these people, who are often atheists, also “alegalists”?

Whatever you call them, they’re more visible and brazen than ever. Writing in Time magazine recently, Richard Stengel insisted that our Constitution “must accommodate each new generation and circumstance.” Georgetown professor Michael Dyson said recently, “When I talk about the document being living and vital, I’m talking about the interpretation of it.” And these appeals are buttressed by the notion that our founding document is fatally flawed. For example, Harvard Law School professor Michael Klarman wrote, “For the most part, the Constitution is irrelevant to the current political design of our nation.” And CNN’s Fareed Zakaria recently opined, “The United States Constitution was … drafted in a cramped room in Philadelphia in 1787 with shades drawn over the windows” — which, presumably, is worse than an idea coming out of his cramped head.

Read the rest here.

Posted in , ,

One response to “Trashing the Constitution: The Living Document Con”

  1. Robert Berger Avatar
    Robert Berger

    Conservatives like Selwyn are always accusing liberals,and even moderates of “trashing” the constitution etc.
    But conservatives use the Constitution as an excuse to justify their own biases,prejudices and even bigotry. The Constitution is whatever they want it to be.
    If they think that something should be illegal, they disingenuously,arrogantly and presumptuously claim that the Constitution demands that it be illegal.
    They’re opposed to abortion, so they claim that the Constitution demands that all pregnant women must give birth or else – even if a pregnancy would kill them or ruin their health,or they are far to poor to provide for that child,or any other children they might already have.But where does the Constitution mandate government-ordered
    compulsory childbearing ? Nowhere.
    Homophobic bigots demand that “sodomy” be recriminalized merely because they happen to be homophobic bigots. But where does the constitution state that the government has the right to pry into the bedrooms of U.S. citizens and to criminalize what consenting adults do in private? Nowhere.
    And the appalling thing is that there are such bigoted judges in America who want to use the Constitution do do this. THEY are the real judicial activists,not liberal judges, and they must be feared, for they have power.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to Robert Berger Cancel reply