The Value of the Constitution in the Modern U.S.

Our founding fathers had visions of freedom and independance that I hold dear. But some in today's U.S. would argue that those visions are outdated. Indeed, the U.S. hase certainly changed in its history, but are the values stated in the Constitution still relevant?

Some (like Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg) interpret the Constitution to mean whatever they want. They refer to my favorite document as a "faded piece of paper".

Others (like me) believe the Constitution should not be interperpreted. They hold look at it with reverance and believe that if the founders wrote it, it must lay out their perfect blueprint for this country.

What are your opinions????

 

I like to believe that I'm pretty strict constructionist.

 

The Constitution is great with the addition of the amendments. But I sure wish the Justices would stop finding things in it that aren't there.

 

I think we can go back to John Marshall for how this started. He had a long history of stating that some parts of a case were clearly obvious when they really weren't. In doing so, he could bypass the parts of a case that didn't fit his opinion without actually using valid law. Actually, the constitution doesn't give the Supreme Court equal power in the checks and balances system, but Chief Justice Marshall did a lot to expand the power of the court system. The only problem is that if you use strict constructionism to view the constitution, it isn't based in valid law.

 

I think that Marshall did the right thing by expanding the power of the courts.

I believe that courts are there to protect the people.

 

And anyway, no one was complaining about the power of the courts until recently when it expanded again and "legislating from the bench" became a catchphrase.

I mean, look at how the people reacted when FDR tried to interfere with the way the Supreme Court did business, despite the fact that the people were generally behind FDR and the Court was most definitely not.

 

Actually, when FDR tried to pack the courts his popularity fell like a rock. He even nicknamed the four conservative justices on the court (McReynolds, Sutherland, Van Devanter, and Butler) the four horsemen of the apocalypse. Until recently, people have generally had this view of the Supreme Court that they are above the politics of Washington, and I think thats part of the problem.

 

Of course the Constitution is going to be interpreted. It has to be to adjust to the realities of today, and that it can and is flexible is part of what makes it the great document that it is. If you don't believe that then please show me where in the US Constitution that the government is allowed to have an Air Force.

By the way, can you point me to where Ginsberg made that comment as I would like to read the source. The current occupant of the White House has also been reported to have allegedly said the Constitution is just a piece of paper.