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My argument is based on several issues one, interpreting the constitution according to the outdated views is not acceptable as a matter of policy.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...
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
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now