Entirely fair points that give weight to the thesis that Constitutions evolve by their lengthy interpretations over time ( "living documents subject to ammendme

Entirely fair points that give weight to the thesis that Constitutions evolve by their lengthy interpretations over time ( "living documents subject to ammendment and interpretation" ) Bare bones, stand alone, Ye Olde clauses such as this are subject to a breadth of literal interpretation. What did they "really" mean? What do we want it to mean? I count the modern US Supreme Court literalists as deceptives, hell bent on framing original clauses to extract the meaning they want in order to apply them how they wish.