Curt Levey has a great piece in National Review explaining that the "living Constitution" theory so beloved of liberals may have died.

May the living Constitution rest in peace. The concept is utterly without meaning as a legal standard and, instead, is a recipe for unrestrained judicial power. Because the Constitution is a contract between the people and their government, its modification should require the consent of the parties to the agreement. Thus, a living Constitution can be analogized to an automobile lease agreement that the car dealer feels free to modify as his notions of a fair deal evolve.

I've used a similar analogy -- how many folks would sign a "living mortgage" that allowed the bank to change the terms over time without the consent of the borrower?

Posted by: Greg at 12:27 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 138 words, total size 1 kb.