It is commonly said today that the Constitution is a "living breathing document." This is a means of suggesting that the meaning, or the principles, of the Constitution change with the times based upon the current needs of society. Is this perspective on the Constitution accurate?
"Toward the preservation of your Government and the permanency of your present happy state, it is requisite not only that you steadily discountenance irregular oppositions to its acknowledged authority, but also that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts." - George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796.
"The history and state of things at the time may be consulted to elucidate the meaning of words, and determine the bona fide intention of the Convention." - John Adams, to Josiah Quincy on interpreting the Constitution, February 9, 1811.
"I entirely concur in the propriety of resorting to the sense in which the Constitution was accepted and ratified by the nation. In that sense alone is the legitimate Constitution. And if that not be the guide in expounding it, there can be no security for a consistent and stable [...] exercise of its powers. [....] What a metamorphosis would be produced in the code of law if all its ancient phraseology were to be taken in its modern sense." - James Madison, to Henry Lee on June 25, 1824.
"On every question of construction, carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, [...] and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." - Thomas Jefferson, admonishment to Supreme Court justice William Johnson on June 12, 1823.
"No reasonable man would contend for an interpretation founded neither in the letter, nor in the spirit of an instrument. Where is controversy to end, if we desert both the letter and the spirit? What is to become of constitutions of government, if they are to rest, not upon the plain import of their words, but upon conjectural enlargements and restrictions, to suit the temporary passions and interests of the day? Let us never forget, that our constitutions of government are solemn instruments, addressed to the common sense of the people and designed to fix, and perpetuate their rights and their liberties. They are not to be frittered away to please the demagogues of the day. They are not to be violated to gratify the ambition of political leaders. They are to speak in the same voice now, and for ever. They are of no man's private interpretation. They are ordained by the will of the people; and can be changed only by the sovereign command of the people." - Joseph Story, Supreme Court Justice appointed by James Madison, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, Rules of Interpretation, Powers not Delegated, 1833.
"It (the Constitution) is to be interpreted, as all other solemn instruments are, by endeavoring to ascertain the true sense and meaning of all the terms; and we are neither to narrow them, nor to enlarge them, by straining them from their just and natural import, for the purpose of adding to, or diminishing its powers, or bending them to any favorite theory or dogma of party. [...] It is not an instrument for the mere private interpretation of any particular men. The people have established it and spoken their will; and their will, thus promulgated, is to be obeyed as the supreme law." - Joseph Story, A Familiar Exposition of the Constitution of the United States, Exposition of the Constitution, The Preamble, 1840. (Parentheses mine.)The wording of the Constitution means the same thing it meant when that wording was adopted. That interpretation is the only "correct" interpretation. The Constitution does not "evolve." It has no intrinsic ability to change on its own. Only through the amendment process can its meaning change. If a portion of text is never changed officially through the amendment process then its meaning never changes. The powers delegated to the various aspects of the federal government, as such, can only be changed through the amendment process.
"If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield." - George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796.
"They (the Founders) believed, that the power of amendment was, if one may so say, the safety-valve to let off all temporary effervescences and excitements; and the real effective instrument to control and adjust the movements of the machinery, when out of order, or in danger of self-destruction." - Joseph Story, A Familiar Exposition of the Constitution of the United States, Mode of making Amendments, 1840.Furthermore, the amendment process was intentionally designed to require protracted debate and overwhelming concurrence. This was intended to prevent the government from fundamentally changing its form, or removing fundamental rights protected by The Constitution, without the knowledge or approval of the people.
"In England the supreme power of the nation resides in parliament; and, in a legal sense, it is so omnipotent, that it has authority to change the whole structure of the constitution, without resort to any confirmation of the people. [...] And it has actually exercised it so far, as to change the succession to the crown, and mold to its will some portions of the internal structure of the constitution." - Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, Mode of Making Amendments, 1833.By contrast under the United States Constitution.
"Two thirds of congress, or of the legislatures of the states, must concur in proposing, or requiring amendments to be proposed; and three fourths of the states must ratify them. Time is thus allowed, and ample time, for deliberation, both in proposing and ratifying amendments. They cannot be carried by surprise, or intrigue, or artifice. Indeed, years may elapse before a deliberate judgment may be passed upon them, unless some pressing emergency calls for instant action. [....] The mode, both of originating and ratifying amendments, (in either mode, which the constitution directs,) must necessarily be attended with such obstacles and delays, as must prove a sufficient bar against light or frequent innovations." - Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, Mode of making Amendments, 1833.
"The framers of the Constitution [...] wisely provided a method, by which it may be amended, without disturbance of the public tranquility, or injury to the general system. [....] This plan has several striking advantages. In the first place, it secures great caution and deliberation, which ought always to be exercised in making any alteration in the fundamental law. Again, specific amendments are to be proposed, which mag be added to the Constitution, without interfering with the ordinary operations of government, or deranging the general system. Moreover, by this means, the attention of the nation will be directed to the particular alterations suggested, and the deliberate opinion of the people, as to the necessity or propriety of their adoption, fully ascertained. [....] This process will, of course, require a considerable time, and that is not the least of its advantages; for no alteration should be made at the instigation of sudden feeling, to suit temporary convenience; or without the utmost caution and deliberation. The happiness and prosperity of the nation depend, under Providence, upon the stability of its institutions; and nothing can have a more ruinous effect, than fluctuation and uncertainty in first principles." - James A. Bayard, A Brief Exposition of the Constitution of the United States, Miscellaneous Subjects, 1833.
No comments:
Post a Comment