THE CONSTITUTION AND THE CONTROVERSY

The Constitution and the Controversy

The Constitution and the Controversy

NOTE: For court examples, please see Appendix.

Introduction

There are 5 sources that the interpretations of the Constitution have been:

(1) The structure and text of the Constitution

(2) The intentions of the drafters, voted to propose, or voted for the ratification of the position in question

(3) (the courts in general) before the preceding

(4) The economic, social and political implications of alternative interpretations and

(5) Law of nature.

People generally believe that the first 3 of these sources to explain the guidelines, but must consider how from three sources, if they point in different directions rather large differences. Most of constitution's interpretation has never been appropriate to justify the different results. Natural law (the highest law, divine law) is now only occasionally providing guidance as an explanation, although many recognize its usefulness makers of the Constitution. A person, original intent sources (text and intent) is heavily dependent often referred to as for "original intent. The people, providing important precedent in favor of weighing outcomes or natural right are known as a flexible interpretation supporter. In practice, the disagreement between the original composer and champion of flexible interpretation are usually referred to judicial review if certain" fundamental rights "that do not apply explicitly protected in the Constitution increased. (Gregory, 1974)

Classifications

There are two types of original intent supporters.

Textualist: original intent who does most of the text and structure of the Constitution. Textualist usually found to be skeptical about the ability of judges to determine collective "intent."

Intentionalist: originality, which is the main intentions of the creators of the weight of the sentence, and ratified.

There are two types of supporters for flexible interpretation.

Pragmatists: an advocate of flexible interpretation, which gives considerable weight of judicial precedents of the outcomes of alternative interpretations, for the reason that in some cases, the decision "wrong" in terms of originality, as it contributes to the stability or otherwise it endorses the public interest.

Theorists of natural law: An individual who has a higher moral law is the law of incompatibility creates success.

Privilege

Any theory of constitution's theory, which wholly disregards the outcomes and focused totally on the text or original intent is not so.

Any theory of constitution's interpretation, which wholly disregarded the text or original intent and focus on the outcomes of this is wrong.

In certain times and places are good for a theory of constitution's interpretation of pasts and right places.

The court must judge on different criteria to constitution's interpretation. A Court without dissenters is a Court that will not adequately inform us of the costs of choosing the path taken. (Kurland & Lerner, 2005)

8 grounds to support the original intent

1. Original intent reduces the likelihood that judges are not elected to take the reins of power from elected officials.

2. Original intent good in the long term, preserving the court's authority.

3. The flexible design gives extra room for judges to demand elitist and subjective values. Judges are impartial and objective criteria for a legitimate ...