Strict vs Loose Construction of the Constitution
I think that the Constitution should be loosely interpreted because it is the LAWS of America, not the ultimate ruling of our lives. Also, the constitution holds important laws, such as free speech, but not the trivial things people worry about, but still matters.
The Constitution is the list of laws, that govern our actions, not our lives. If the constitution was supposed to rule every second of our lives, than American citizens would not be considered free. I bet not even the president thinks, “does the constitution let me do this?” while he is brushing his teeth, or putting on his socks. If everyone interpreted it literally, many people would not know what they are or aren’t allowed to do. Another scenario would be that the constitution would be a lot longer, telling American citizens every little detail of their lives that they are or aren’t allowed to do.
Like I said, the Constitution does not hold more “trivial” actions, and what we are supposed to do while making a decision. The constitution’s list of laws does not hold anything about animal rights, which (hopefully) people know not to abuse or neglect their pets and other animals. Also, the Constitution does not hold driving laws, because at the time it was written, cars were not invented. If everyone held the constitution as the only laws, then everyone would be speeding and drunk-driving and they would not be arrested or receive a ticket for their actions. Besides, when the Constitution was written, things were very different than they are now, in modern times. That is why today’s politicians pass laws that are relevant to today’s happenings and events.
There is a “clause,” no not Santa Clause, that gives Congress the right to create and pass laws relevant and important to our country. This very important clause was named the elastic clause. So congress would not be able to create a law saying that you can’t wear blue hats on Tuesday.
Thanks for reading my blog!
