The Constitution Has Lost a Champion

Admittedly I'm not a Constitutional scholar but I have undertaken considerable effort to study it to try to make myself as knowledgeable as possible of its content, meaning and history. In the past, I have argued that the US Constitution is not a "living, breathing" document as the progressives of today contend. After more careful consideration, I have come to rethink this position - somewhat. The Constitution is a "living, breathing" document just as a Leyland Cypress and a Giant Sequoia are both living, breathing trees. Progressives are like gardeners who prefer the quick growing Leylands while Conservatives view the Constitution as foresters view Sequoias that change slowly but steadily over many, many years.

Since there is a slow, laborious process that was put into place by the Framers to allow the Constitution to evolve, I think the strongest argument for how the document was meant to exhibit a "living, breathing" nature is like sequoias managed by responsible foresters. Unfortunately, the quick growing Leylands approach advocated by Progressives produces weak, shallow roots that will not sustain a long-lived, stable government. We need the deep, strong root structure of the mighty sequoia tended by judicial "foresters".

Associate Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was one such judicial forester. As an originalist, Justice Scalia believed that laws had to conform to the Constitution as written. He opposed "legislating from the bench" and an open interpretation of the Constitution that allowed trendy laws of today to change the original intent of the Framers. In his view, the Constitution could be changed but that change should come from the deliberate, methodical process prescribe in the document itself - through the amendment process. With his death Saturday morning at the age of 79, the US Constitution has lost a true champion. Rest in Peace Justice Scalia.