Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Constitutional Originalism
A living constitution is a concept that is found in the United States, it is also referred to as loose constitution. This is because it is a constitutional interpretation that the constitution is dynamic in meaning. It claims that the constitution has human properties since it constantly changes .I hold a strong opinion for the constitution to be interpreted as a living constitution due to several reasons. The idea of a living constitution is often associated with the views that a society which is contemporaneous should be factored in when key constitution phrases are being interpreted.
My argument is based on several issues one, interpreting the constitution according to the outdated views is not acceptable as a matter of policy. It is very necessary for the constitution to be interpreted from an evolving perspective. Secondly the people who wrote the constitution originally wrote it in terms that are broad and flexible that led to creation of a dynamic living document. A living constitution is just a characteristic and not a specific mode of interpreting the constitution. It is associated with a number of non-originalist theories that interpret it. Among the common associations of a living constitution is the judicial pragmatism (Straus, 2010). According to this pragmatism view the constitution ought to be taken as undergoing evolution over time as a factor of necessity in the society. When looking at the original meaning of the constitution whose intention was majorly to allow major practices that are condemned universally in the world today, there is enough reason to reject pure originalism. This fact instead supports...
For instance the requirements in the constitution fort equal rights should be read and interpreted considering the standards of equality that currently exist. They should not be according to those found in many decades ago since they would not be accepted. This calls for interpretation of the constitution according to the current state of living which can only be given by a living constitution. The constitution was originally written in a flexible and broad way that could accommodate the changes that could come over time such as technological and social changes. Therefore, the original intention of the writers of the constitution was to come up with a document that could undergo changes over time depending on the needs of the society at that time.
The world has changed in so many ways, there has been growth of territories by nations and population has increased .there has been a change in technology as social norms. All these changes are too great to have bee foreseen in the initial constitution drafts that were written. It is therefore not very realistic to go through cumbersome amendment processes for the incorporation of these changes. Therefore, the living constitution is the only solution to these changes which does not entail a long and cumbersome process but simple interpretation of the constitution to cover the changes (Strauss, 2010).
The living constitution can be easily applied an example of an application of the living constitution can be seen in the reference by the Supreme court to standards…
References
Chin, J & Stern, A.(1997). The Living Constitution. Retrieved April 27,2013 from http://library.thinkquest.org/11572/constitution/important/living.html
Straus, D.(2010).The living constitution. Retrieved April 27, 2013 from http://www.bsos.umd.edu/gvpt/lpbr/subpages/reviews/Strauss1010.htm
Strauss, D.A.(2010).The living constitution. Retrieved April 27, 2013 from http://www.law.uchicago.edu/alumni/magazine/fall10/strauss
Wainwright v Gideon In 1961, a man named Clarence Earl Gideon was arrested for stealing coins and alcohol from a Panama City, Florida, pool hall. He was a poor man and could not afford a lawyer. Following his conviction, he served five years in prison. During that time, he sent a handwritten letter to the Supreme Court in which he explained that he had been forced to fend for himself in
Government originalism OR non-Originalism Non-Original Interpretation of the Constitution A substantial amount of debate has occurred in recent times regarding questions of legislation and the interpretation of the constitution. The two primary factions in this debate are that of the originalists, which are largely in favor of a literal interpretation of the constitution and the intention of its founding authors, and that of non-originalists, which are more likely to consider the outcome
District of Columbia v. Heller District of Columbia vs. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) represents the U.S. Supreme Court's single biggest intervention in Second Amendment jurisprudence. The case was one which had been deliberately manufactured by a small cadre of ideologues: the case was organized and funded from the first by Robert Levy, a Senior Fellow with the libertarian Cato Institute. In 2010, Levy would address his own achievements in getting
Gun Violence in Australia & its impact on federalism & coordinated gun control policy. Gun violence yielding en masse public murders in Australia have provoked the question of whether laws governing guns are too lenient or perhaps have enabled the dangers arising from unregistered firearms. The role of federalism has begged the question of whether more jurisdictional authority is needed by one of the provincial levels of Australian government. First however,
Living Constitutionalism As the leader of the free world, the United States remains in the limelight as the rest of the world keeps a keen eye on how they conduct their affairs. As it appertains to constitutional interpretation, the U.S. has a sound philosophy dubbed 'living constitutionalism.' In the American constitutional dispensation, as in other countries, the letter of the law is unequivocal. That notwithstanding, many agree that every society is
U.S. Constitution: Discussion Questions A) The Fourteenth Amendment: the Case of Whitney V. California 274 U.S. 357 Whitney V. California (No. 3) Argued: October 6, 1925 Decided: May 16, 1927 453 Affirmed Location: Socialist Convention at Loring Hall Factual Analysis: Anita Charlotte Whitney, who subscribed to the CLPC (Communist Labor Party of California), found herself was arraigned for breaching the state's 'Criminal Syndicalism Act', which forbade any actions aiding or advocating crime commission, including "terrorism as a means