Vanquish
Vanquisher of shills
- Aug 14, 2009
- 2,663
- 358
- 98
- Thread starter
- #61
It should be applied as written and not interpreted, it isn't cuniform.
If part of it no longer works or is unwanted there is a procedure for change.
Of course, the current government just ignores it now.
It is impossible to read the Constitution, and not interpret what you read. That goes for anything you read. To state that the Constitution should not be interpreted in any manner what so ever, is dangerous and naive.
Law is not a river that every time you step in, it changes. There's no purpose in having a written document if you're not holding people to what is written.
If judges can just make it up, then it's entirely illusory.
I'll give you that legislative intent can clear up grey areas. I've done enough research of floor debates to admit that. It's debatable whether the founding fathers meant their individual writings to speak for the entirety of the group. It speaks to each one, but not "necessarily" to the whole.
And are there times when neither the plain meaning of the law, nor the legislative intent, nor the precedent can yield something clear at all?
Unfortunately yes. But that's not the majority of the time.