| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | A '''living Constitution''' (or sometimes known as an "[[Evolving constitution]]") is one that changes based on the changing values of the people. As a practical matter, it means the [[U.S. Constitution]] should be interpreted however a majority of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] feels. This view of the Constitution is closely associated with [[judicial activism]] and is responsible for some of the most dangerous rulings in history, especially ''[[Roe v. Wade]]''. | | A '''living Constitution''' (or sometimes known as an "[[Evolving constitution]]") is one that changes based on the changing values of the people. As a practical matter, it means the [[U.S. Constitution]] should be interpreted however a majority of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] feels. This view of the Constitution is closely associated with [[judicial activism]] and is responsible for some of the most dangerous rulings in history, especially ''[[Roe v. Wade]]''. |
| − |
| |
| − | The phrase "living Constitution" was expressly used by the [[liberal]] four-Justice dissent in ''Rummel v. Estelle'', 445 U.S. 263 (1980), and it has been implicitly embraced by the left side of the Court in numerous rulings.
| |
| | | | |
| | ==History== | | ==History== |
| Line 11: |
Line 9: |
| | {{cquote|All that progressives ask or desire is permission-in an era when “development," "evolution," is the scientific word-to interpret the Constitution according to the Darwinian principle; all they ask is recognition of the fact that a nation is a living thing and not a machine.<ref>{{cite web |title=Woodrow Wilson Asks “What Is Progress?” |url=http://www.heritage.org/initiatives/first-principles/primary-sources/woodrow-wilson-asks-what-is-progress |work=[[Heritage Foundation]]}}</ref>}} | | {{cquote|All that progressives ask or desire is permission-in an era when “development," "evolution," is the scientific word-to interpret the Constitution according to the Darwinian principle; all they ask is recognition of the fact that a nation is a living thing and not a machine.<ref>{{cite web |title=Woodrow Wilson Asks “What Is Progress?” |url=http://www.heritage.org/initiatives/first-principles/primary-sources/woodrow-wilson-asks-what-is-progress |work=[[Heritage Foundation]]}}</ref>}} |
| | | | |
| − | Other progressives have also had a hand in the development of this concept, such as [[Louis Brandeis]] with his [[Louis Brandeis#Brandeis_Brief|Brandeis Brief]]. Brandeis would later catalog some of his thoughts on what had occurred.<ref>The Living Law, Illinois Law Review, February 16, 1916</ref> | + | Other progressives have also had a hand in the development of this concept, such as [[Louis Brandeis]] with his [[Louis Brandeis#Brandeis_Brief|Brandeis Brief]]. Brandeis would later catalog some of his thoughts on what had occurred.<ref>The Living Law,, [[Louis Brandeis]] Illinois Law Review, February 16, 1916</ref> |
| | | | |
| | ===Phrase=== | | ===Phrase=== |
| | The full phrase "Living constitution" would not appear until 1927 with the publication of the book "''The Living constitution, a consideration of the realities and legends of our fundamental law''", by Howard Lee McBain. | | The full phrase "Living constitution" would not appear until 1927 with the publication of the book "''The Living constitution, a consideration of the realities and legends of our fundamental law''", by Howard Lee McBain. |
| | + | |
| | + | ==Usage== |
| | + | The phrase "living Constitution" was expressly used by the [[liberal]] four-Justice dissent in ''Rummel v. Estelle'', 445 U.S. 263 (1980), and it has been implicitly embraced by the left side of the Court in numerous rulings. |
| | | | |
| | ==See Also== | | ==See Also== |