Dr. Martin Hash Podcast

Of course, The Framers of The Constitution could not predict the future so they included an amendment process, but they probably didn't envision that what seems clear and unambiguous to some, would be so differently interpreted by others. Such disputes go to the Supreme Court to decide; however, even in the Supreme Court, interpretations among the nine justices often conflict, especially among those with opposing ideologies: the libertyists vs. the egalitarians. Several interpretative strategies have emerged to resolve such issues, scholastically known as: Originalism, Modernism, Literalism & Democratic.

Original Intent proponents think the best way to interpret The Constitution is to determine what the Framers intended. They look to other sources, including the contemporary writings of the framers, newspaper articles, etc. Of course, Originalists consider the original intent to be the most pure way, usually finding a quote somewhere at sometime from a Framer to support their position.

Historical Literalists ignore the contemporary writings of the Framers; they contend that only way to interpret the Constitution is a literal reading of the words, with an expert knowledge in their 18th century meaning. Conversely, A Contemporary Literalist has no interest in the historical meaning of the words but relies solely on the modern definitions.

The opposing method of interpretation, Modernism, looks at the Constitution as if it were ratified today with the morals and beliefs of current times. Modernists think The Constitution is deliberately vague, expressly to permit modern interpretations to override older ones: this is also known as the “Living Constitution.” concept.

The Democratic interpretationists claim that The Constitution is not designed to be a set of specific principles and guidelines, but simply a basic skeleton on which contemporary ideas could be molded onto. This is where the concept of “activist judges” originates; Elites who put their own, or the majority of the population's, morals & values above those of the Framers; a tyranny of the majority approach that egalitarians must resort to if they are going to overcome the frustration of their ideals that adhering to a liberty-based Constitution imposes.