4 Easy Ways to Argue the Constitution is Not a “Living Document”

The late Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia said it best when he declared, “The Constitution is not a living organism… it’s a legal document.” Liberal professors and students will often bash conservatives when they stand up for an orginalist interpretation of the United States Constitution in the classroom. Here are four key responses you can use next time a liberal tells you the Constitution is a living document and needs to be constantly changed.

1. Use their language to disprove their argument and tell them “Yes, the Constitution is a living document, but not in the way that you think!” It’s very much alive in that it will always be relevant no matter what the cultural or political climate may be.  The Constitution will never be dead. It will always be an integral part of what makes America the greatest nation on earth.

2. The Constitution is not a dynamic document. It was not meant to be interpreted in a way to achieve a desired policy-based outcome. The authors did not intend for it to be changed every time there was a swing in popular opinion. The legislative branch of government is filled with officials directly elected by the people serves that purpose.

3. The genius of the United States Constitution is that it was constructed to withstand the test of time. There are ways to add amendments, but the process is extremely difficult for the reason that it was not intended for it to be easily changed.

4. The Constitution withholds power from the government and gives it to the people. Altering it to give the government more power will be an ultimately irreversible act that can be detrimental to individual liberty.

Constitutional principles, like conservative principles, are timeless. It is the responsibility of conservatives to fight for the preservation of such principles despite the ever-changing political, cultural, and moral climate.  The truths found in the Constitution were self-evident in 1789, and still remain so 227 years later.