Agree. To extend your argument, we find that over the years that the application of the constitution has to be understood in new contexts. It doesn't evolve, bu

Agree. To extend your argument, we find that over the years that the application of the constitution has to be understood in new contexts. It doesn't evolve, but how it is understood to apply is discussed and what it covers does. That's why textualism/originalism is important: if we understand what someone said and why they said it, we can better represent the intention of the rule here, several hundred years later.