Examples Of Textual Interpretation Of The Constitution

4 Should the language of the U.S Constitution be applied in its original meaning or should it be applied in a more expansive sense? Explain

The Constitution should change with society. Like all societies, ours changes with time. Like it or not, things will be different in the future. Although we agree with things we are doing now, we may not in the future. Our constitution is ment to be part of a lasting government in the land of the free. If the USA really wishes to be held up to that title, its people must be able to agree, and if needed, change the Constitution.

A 3rd Article of the Constitution talks about the Judicial Branch. It says that there will be a court and then a “supreme” court that will make many decisions. It later says what kind of cases the federal government gets to hear. The framers wrote detailed descriptions for this Article so that the Judicial system new what cases they got and what cases the federal government got. Without the description, the federal government could possibly override the Supreme Court and get all of the cases. The framers also saw that this Article would need provisions because new cases would arise and new courts would come around.

The United States Supreme Court was, and still is today, the important backbone of America’s judicial system. This court deals with numerous cases throughout the year and keeps the country and government fair with its decisions. However, being responsible for giving justice where it is due, the Court is sometimes faced with hard choices that will make a lasting impression on the U.S. and its people. In the case of Loving v. Virginia, it did just that. As a Supreme Court landmark case, Loving v. Virginia definitely indicated a critical moment of change in civil rights for America and interracial couples everywhere.

A court is a way for society to formally punish wrongdoers or criminals and make decisions. Courts determine behaviors based on society beliefs on what is acceptable behavior and which behavior is not and deserves punishment. Courts also decide on what is fair, just, punishment, how long to enforce a punishment, and innocents. Courts interrupt laws that can have impact on citizens, businesses, private parties, government officials, and many more. The purpose of the court is to upholding the law, protecting individuals, resolving disputes and reinforcing social norms. There are three elements to be considered a court in America. The first is the court must have the proper legal authority to be a court. This is given by constitutions or statues that have been created. The second is courts are found in the judicial branch. There are some exceptions to this but for the most part all courts will fall under the judicial branch. The third is when a court makes a

The Constitutional is centered around power and where that power comes from. The enumerated powers established in Article 1, Section 8 have also given Congress the power to carry out laws in order to follow previously established powers. Governments stretch and bend problems in such a way that they will fit under the enumerated powers of the Constitution. All the enumerated powers have a list of adjunct statute not stated in the strict interpretation of the power. The Necessary and Proper Clause authorizes Congress to pass laws and the adoption of theses laws prompt questions. Examples of questions would be: “How strong must the means-end connection between the primary policy and the secondary rule be?” or “ What are the side effects of this law and how does it impact society?” Laws passed under the clause are placed under judicial review which determines if it applies under the Constitution.

The Constitution defines the separation of branches, accounts for checks and balances and division of power, and includes a Bill of Rights designed to protect individual rights from the Federal Government. Interestingly enough, the protection of individual rights were excluded from the United States Constitution originally, and only added later (Bowers. 1993). While having an extremely thorough and detailed Constitution has its benefits, it also leaves room for many different types of interpretations. The Judicial Branch court systems is a specific example of a detailed Constitution being constantly interpreted. Unlike the United States Constitution, the Nevada Constitution tends to be more specific regarding limitations on the powers of the state. Since state constitutions tend to be longer and thus more specific, judges have less room for interpretation as the state constitution, even in conformity with the United States Constitution, is more defined resulting from State Constitutions needing to cover more functions pertaining to state issues.

The United States Constitution is the very foundation that the nation has been built upon, but its birth was not easy. The framers of the Constitution divided over many key issues relating to it and often argued at length over the creation, ratification, and implementation of this imperative document. Since the Constitution came into being it has been the epicenter of Civil Rights reforms, questions of state sovereignty versus national supremacy, and recently it has been looked to for questions about universal healthcare and what may or may not constitute a marriage. Currently the oldest “living” Constitution in the world; interpreting the United States

     When the Federalist party was organized in 1791, those people who favored a strong central government and a loose constitutional interpretation coagulated and followed the ideals of men such as Alexander Hamilton. The first opposition political party in the United States was the Republican party, which held power, nationally, between 1801 and 1825. Those who were in favor of states rights and a strict construction of the constitution fell under the leadership of Thomas Jefferson. These Jeffersonian republicans, also known as anti-federalists, believed in strict adherence to the writings of the constitution. They wanted state’s rights and individual rights, which they believed could only be granted under

Both of these interpretations are ways to go around the laws already set in stone. I believe that there should be some type of law created to protect the constitution. I do not agree with either interpretations and I believe that they are both wrong. These are examples of flaws in the constitution that should be dealt with. As I listened to this debate I realized and understood more and more

I prefer to the approach of living when interpreting the Constitution. I think the majority of law should change and evolve over time as the society advances constantly. The Constitution was established over two hundred years and it was created to deal with the issues at that time. With time passed by, some terms were not suitable for the current issues. The pioneers who drafted the Constitution could not predict the changes on the technology, the economy, the international relationship and the social media. It was not realistic to make the outdated rules to guide the life of people invariably. Changing the law with the time was a positive practice, so that the Constitution could better fit the society.

Statutory interpretation is process of interpreting statutes by the judges. The definition of statutes have had very specific words but indeed the judges would still need the statutory interpretation to help them. The reason of this, even how, the words in the statutes are specific but sometimes the words contains ambiguity and vagueness in words. On top of that, each word could give us different meaning. For example, we can find in the Oxford Dictionary where a word would contain at least one meaning. Hence, without the statutory interpretation, a lot of judges would have trouble in deciding their judgments in deciding a case. This essay will analyse the four rules, intrinsic aids and extrinsic aids and presumptions in the interpretation

Certain historical considerations are essential. The words are to be understood by those for whom they were written, and therefore we must know what those understandings where. Christopher Wolfe believes that the framers would tend to give preferences in such cases to the fair reading of the document itself.

When the United States Constitution was established, the founding fathers devised the core of the court system that is present in today’s society. The state and federal government each have a version of a Supreme Court which is typically led by a Chief Justice. The states level Supreme Court Justice governs the issues that pertains to the citizens within the respective state. These individuals will also take part in hearings or proceedings that impact of law of the state and hear constitutional cases with regards to the state. On the federal side, a Supreme Court Chief Justice will operates more on a national

1. When interpreting legislation, the Courts use several approaches to aid their interpretation. Describe how the literal, golden and mischief rules of interpretation operate.