My topic is the following: 1. Should judges interpret the Constitution the way the founders intended, or should judges interpret it in light of changing circumstances?; and 2. Should judges make their rulings based on the wording of the law, or should they make rulings that benefit society? I want my essay to conclude and argue the following thesis: While many will criticize originalism by saying it allows “the dead hand of the past” to influence current interpretations, striking down judicial decisions for this reason would be analogous to reversing laws once the people who enacted them died. The Articles, including Article five, and Bill of Rights contained in the United Sates constitution must be interpreted in exactly the same manner as our framers. So, in other words, please have my essay conclude that judges need to use judicial restraint in interpreting the constitution, and that textualism is how we should interpret statutory laws. Not judicial activism and judges should not legislating from the bench.
Sample Solution
