The supreme court debated as a 'living constitution' 4.6

Question 1

what are the arguments SUPPORTING a ‘living constitution’

Answer 1

• Unfulfilled Promises in the Constitution’s Preamble
• Judicial Activism as a Necessary Tool
• Adapting Principles to Modern Contexts
• Broadening Constitutional Protections

Question 2

why is ‘Unfulfilled Promises in the Constitution’s Preamble’ a reason which SUPPORTS the ‘living constitution’

Answer 2

• eventhough Preamble promises protection to all american’s, there has been prejudice before
• therefor, judicial review and activism is needed to help minorities

Question 3

why is ‘Judicial Activism as a Necessary Tool’ a reason which SUPPORTS the ‘living constitution’

Answer 3

• courts play a vital role in advancing these constitutional values when elected officials, representing majority interests, fail to extend rights to minority groups.

Question 4

why is ‘Adapting Principles to Modern Contexts’ a reason which SUPPORTS the ‘living constitution’

Answer 4

• Founding Fathers could not predict all future societal changes
• potentially intended for the Constitution to be interpreted flexibly
• helped overturn discriminatory cases such as Roe vs Wade 1973, Brown vs Board of E. 1954 and Obergefell vs Hodges 2015

Question 5

why is ‘Broadening Constitutional Protections’ a reason which SUPPORTS the ‘living constitution’

Answer 5

• the Supreme Court has actively broadened constitutional protections
• help protect rights of detainees during the “war on terror,” as in Rasul v. Bush (2004) and Boumediene v. Bush (2008)
• helped protect rights of individuals like in Lawrence v. Texas (2003)

Question 6

what are the arguments REJECTING a ‘living constitution’

Answer 6

• Undermines the Constitution’s Purpose
• Politicisation of the Judiciary
• Threatens Liberty and Separation of Powers

Question 7

why is ‘Undermines the Constitution’s Purpose’ a reason which REJECTS the ‘living constitution’

Answer 7

• constitution’s role is to provide a stable, consistent framework for governance
• If reinterpreted with each generation, it loses this guiding function, eroding its foundational authority

Question 8

why is ‘Politicisation of the Judiciary’ a reason which REJECTS the ‘living constitution’

Answer 8

• personal and political preferences into judicial decisions rather than relying on objective interpretations.
• as seen in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) = judges shape laws based on current trends instead of established precedents

Question 9

why is ‘Threatens Liberty and Separation of Powers’ a reason which REJECTS the ‘living constitution’

Answer 9

• disrupts the balance of powers by allowing the judiciary to overstep its role and engage in policymaking
• turns the Supreme Court into an unaccountable quasi-legislative body