February 15, 2006

Question to "living document" advocates

If the Constitution is a "living document" which can be changed without amendment based on current social needs, then why did the Founders write it down? The British had (and still have) a 'living Constitution' that wasn't written. Surely if they believed the Constitution was 'flexible' then they would have adopted the British model, wouldn't they?

Danny has more on living document Constitutionalism.

UPDATE: Related from McQ.

By Rusty Shackleford, Ph.D. at 10:06 AM | |