their interpretation and reinterpretations of what the founding pantheon ordained. In reality, it was meant to be a living document that evolved with the times

their interpretation and reinterpretations of what the founding pantheon ordained. In reality, it was meant to be a living document that evolved with the times The paragraph as a whole was written as if the above two claims were contradictory. To the degree that the framers intended the constitution to be a living document, there is provision for a court to interpret the document and for the legislature and states to apply updates. Are there some other unrealized means for a constitution to be more alive?