3 ms·
> "interpret the constitution as it was written" > amendments "was written" would not include "amendments". Perhaps it was meant to be "is written" and that w
by zimpenfish 6y ago
> "interpret the constitution as it was written"
> amendments
"was written" would not include "amendments".
Perhaps it was meant to be "is written" and that would definitely include the amendments but then you absolutely do not get to call yourself an "Originalist" because, e.g., the 19th was passed 130 years after the Constitution was written and for damn sure none of the framers were still alive then.
- skinkestek 6y agoClearly I meant the whole constitution, including every accepted amendment; I suppose they become part of the constitution as soon as they are accepted? Anyway I think this should be obvious. The subset of people who has long time accounts on HN and who also are for slavery is really small, possibly non-existent.
- Clubber 6y agoDifferent parts of the constitution were written at different times. Amendments are part of the constitution regardless of when they were written. Originalists interpret the applicable parts of the constitution as they were written, when they were written. Search Scalia on the topic and watch some videos. He goes into pretty interesting depth on the subject. It's pretty fascinating. https://www.c-span.org/video/?292678-1/justices-breyer-scalia-constitution-forum https://www.c-span.org/video/?292678-1/justices-breyer-scali...