This story is unavailable.

In the interest of full disclosure, I love the thought of having a conservative like Gorsuch on the Court.

But that was just for transparency. My real question is, if an originalist interpretation of the Constitution is so absurd, why have a Constitution? If you can reinterpret it at will based on changing circumstances and public opinion, then it’s meaningless. Yes, there are some things the Constitution got wrong. But there’s a process in place for fixing that. Yes, that process is lengthy and cumbersome…but it’s supposed to be.

What I just can’t wrap my head around is how the idea of reinterpreting the Constitution as you see fit at any given point in time doesn’t render it null and void.

Like what you read? Give Patti Podnar a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.