Just and Holy Principles

Independence Hall in Philadelphia, PA

Principles: Federalism, Individual Liberty, Separation of Powers

Article: CBN: Constitution: Living Document or Original Intent?

Article Summary: Some legal experts believe that judges should interpret the Constitution based on the original intent of the founding fathers while others believe that the Constitution is a “living document”; therefore, they should interpret it broadly to adapt to changing circumstances. (This article is from 2005 but nicely outlines in simple terms the basic views on different methods of interpreting the Constitution)

My Thoughts: September 17, 1787 was a momentous day in the history of the United States. After nearly four months of intense deliberation and debate, 39 of the 55 delegates from the states gathered in Independence Hall in Philadelphia to sign the newly drafted Constitution of the United States of America. In 2004, Congress designated September 17th (the 18th this year, the 17th falling on a weekend) as Constitution Day in honor of that revered document. Happy Constitution Day!

The fact that we have a federal holiday honoring the Constitution begs the question: why the celebration?

The Keystone of Our Nation

Following is how the Brethren may respond to that question:

Gordon B. Hinckley: [The Constitution] is the keystone of our nation. It is the great guarantee of liberty. That original document, with the Bill of Rights, constitutes the charter of our freedom.

Ezra Taft Benson: I reverence the Constitution of the United States as a sacred document. To me its words are akin to the revelations of God, for God has placed His stamp of approval on the Constitution of this land. I testify that the God of heaven sent some of His choicest spirits to lay the foundation of this government, and He has sent other choice spirits to preserve it.

Joseph Smith: We say, that the Constitution of the United States is a glorious standard; it is founded in the wisdom of God. It is a heavenly banner; it is to all those who are privileged with the sweets of liberty, like the cooling shades and refreshing waters of a great rock in a thirsty and weary land. It is like a great tree under whose branches men from every clime can be shielded from the burning rays of the sun.
(see sources and read more quotes)

Just and Holy Principles

What are the principles embedded in the Constitution that render it worthy of our reverence? Let us list a few:

1. Individual Liberty: remembering the injustices that the King of Great Britain had imposed upon them, the colonists were adamant about protecting the individual rights of the people. They added the Bill of Rights as the first ten amendments to the Constitution in order to protect those God given rights.

2. Federalism: most of the delegates to the convention were reluctant to form a national government that would take power from the states. At the same time, they recognized a need for a stronger national government that would provide defense against foreign aggressors and resolve disputes between the states; therefore, they instituted a government structure called federalism that assigned specific powers to the national government and left all remaining powers with the states.

3. Separation of Powers: the delegates were extremely concerned with the balance of power between the three branches of the national government. They had fled from Britain to escape the clutches of a brutal monarch and wanted no such ruler to obtain power here. They were also concerned with factions, or interest groups, gaining too much power. They organized a system of checks and balances that provided a separation and delicate balance of national powers among the Executive, Judicial, and Legislative branches.

An Imperfect Document

Out of the Convention emerged a legal document based on these principles that would change the world, but the document was not perfect. For example, in order to prevent the southern states from revolting, the northern delegates had to allow slavery to remain legal. Fortunately, they inserted a provision to establish an amendment process that made it possible to adjust the Constitution for future unforseeable circumstances. This amendment process allowed us eventually to abolish slavery and make other necessary changes over the last 230 years.

Still Relevant Today?

Many people believe that the Constitution suited our nation well at its founding but is now out of date. Therefore, they believe the courts must interpret its principles broadly to adapt to our evolving social values. For example, the Constitution says nothing explicitly about abortion, which was not a significant issue at the time of the founding. Thus, when a state legislature passes a law legalizing abortion today, how should the courts go about assessing the constitutionality of such a law? They could interpret the Constitution broadly by ruling that, although not stated, it implies a “right to privacy” which includes a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy, or they could interpret it based on the “original intent” of the Founders by ruling that since the Constitution includes no right to abortion, such a right did not exist in their view and still does not exist.

In 1973, in a case called Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court chose to interpret the Constitution broadly by declaring abortion to be a fundamental right, thus overriding state laws previously banning abortion.

In my opinion, the Supreme Court’s act of declaring state anti-abortion laws unconstitutional was in itself unconstitutional. The court exceeded its powers. Since the Constitution is silent on abortion, the Court should have let the states’ laws stand. Then, if we the people were to decide that abortion should be legal, we could authorize an amendment to the Constitution making it so. In this way, the Constitution is a “living document,” meaning that change is possible through the amendment process but not through the courts.

What do you think?