A person’s claim to be a “constitutionalist” is absurd. The Constitution requires the President, members of Congress & State legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, federal and State, by oath or affirmation, swear to uphold The Constitution. [FN1] 1/10

The people who wrote The Constitution were satisfied that their words sufficiently set forth their intent. Today some disagree. “Constitutionalism,” as advocated by one group, means judges can interpret, “but only within the meaning of its original intent.” [FN2] 2/10

The 55 delegates who attended the Convention included 31 lawyers [FN3] who were aware of rules of construction of constitutions. They could have adopted such a rule. (see n. 2, supra) The concept of “original intent” was addressed in public debate by Madison, who said his 3/10

“original intention should not count [] What should count is objective constitutional meaning, broadly accepted understanding, and consistent practice.” [FN4] “Constitutionalists” choose to ignore the provision for Amendment. [FN5] Slavery & “land of the free” conflict. 4/10

James Wilson explained to Pennsylvania’s ratification convention that “slavery” was omitted from the text as “laying the foundation for banishing slavery out of this country.” [FN6] The possible abolition of slavery was cited by 4 States that seceded and said “why.” [FN7] 5/10

Generations of slaves’ lives was consideration for the Civil War Amendments. [FN8] Framers’ original intent is irrelevant to many aspects of the Constitution. Otherwise, right-wing justices who espouse original intent should resign. Barrett and Thomas can’t even vote. 6/10

Footnotes:
FN1. The President shall “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. U.S. Const. Art. II, sec. 1; other office holders, Art. VI.
FN2. “If you’re a constitutionalist, you value the constitution as our founders envisioned. 7/10

Footnotes:
FN2. (cont’d)You believe in limited government and individual rights. You believe that the constitution is a living document that judges can interpret, but only within the meaning of its original intent.” ConstitutionUS.com 8/10

Footnotes:
FN3. Stewart, “The Summer of 1787,” 2007, pp. Ix-x.
FN4. Paulsen, Michael Stokes, “The Relevance and Irrelevance of James Madison to Faithful Constitutional Interpretation,” National Constitution Center, p.5. 9/10

Footnotes:
FN5. U.S. Const. Art. V.
FN6. James Wilson was a delegate to the Constitutional Convention; Eliot’s Debates, Vol. 2, pp. 451-52.
FN7. Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi and Texas. 10/10
FN8. U.S. Const. Amend XIII, XIV, XV.