Difference between revisions of "Loose constructionism"
(Tags: Mobile edit, Mobile web edit) |
(Tags: Mobile edit, Mobile web edit) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Loose constructionists say that courts should practice [[judicial activism]] by abiding by what the Constitution figuratively says. The converse of this is the idea that the United States Constitution should be interpreted [[strict constructionism|strictly]], refusing to creating new rights that aren't explicitly in the Constitution. The Constitution itself spells out the procedures for amending the document to include new rights. Loose constructionists disrespect this process, unlike strict constructionists. | Loose constructionists say that courts should practice [[judicial activism]] by abiding by what the Constitution figuratively says. The converse of this is the idea that the United States Constitution should be interpreted [[strict constructionism|strictly]], refusing to creating new rights that aren't explicitly in the Constitution. The Constitution itself spells out the procedures for amending the document to include new rights. Loose constructionists disrespect this process, unlike strict constructionists. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Loose constructionism was originally advocated by Hamilton in order to allow the [[American School]] to be executed, which was very [[nationalist]]. Cases that used [[loose constructionism]] were not forms of [[judicial activism]], as Hamilton condemned it in [[Federalist No. 78|Federalist Paper No. 78]]. However, [[liberals]] started to use it over time to justify wrongly-reasoned court decisions that allowed many of their economic programs to exist that were meant to promote "equality". Therefore, it became a tool used by liberals to undermine the legitimacy of the judicial branch. | ||
[[Category:Law]] | [[Category:Law]] | ||
[[Category:Judicial Activism]] | [[Category:Judicial Activism]] | ||
Revision as of 23:51, December 24, 2020
Loose constructionism is a judicial principle, first developed by Alexander Hamilton's Federalist Party, which interprets provisions of the United States Constitution broadly.
Loose constructionists say that courts should practice judicial activism by abiding by what the Constitution figuratively says. The converse of this is the idea that the United States Constitution should be interpreted strictly, refusing to creating new rights that aren't explicitly in the Constitution. The Constitution itself spells out the procedures for amending the document to include new rights. Loose constructionists disrespect this process, unlike strict constructionists.
Loose constructionism was originally advocated by Hamilton in order to allow the American School to be executed, which was very nationalist. Cases that used loose constructionism were not forms of judicial activism, as Hamilton condemned it in Federalist Paper No. 78. However, liberals started to use it over time to justify wrongly-reasoned court decisions that allowed many of their economic programs to exist that were meant to promote "equality". Therefore, it became a tool used by liberals to undermine the legitimacy of the judicial branch.
