Soon, the U.S. Senate will vote to confirm or reject President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court, Judge Neil Gorsuch, whose record as a jurist places him in the conservative, or “originalist” sector of the political spectrum. The late Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, whose seat is to be filled, practiced the originalist interpretation defining the Constitution as “enduring, not what society, much less the Court, thinks it should mean, but what it meant when it was adopted.”
Compared to many other constitutions, the U.S. Constitution, adopted in 1788, has “endured,” and has provided many generations of Americans with protection from a government which could have become tyrannical. The Supreme Court has on many occasions “checked” the other branches and thus provided the needed “balance.” But upon other occasions it has delivered verdicts which amounted to the making of law as, for example, in case of Roe v. Wade. And, not only does the Supreme Court have the final word, but its justices are not held accountable by “We the People.” (I would like to see this changed.)
Some think of the Constitution as a “living document” meaning that it should be interpreted as to what society wants at the moment. I have heard the expression “social growth,” the meaning of which escapes me. A “living document” sounds more like a foundation of sand – shifting, sliding and sinking.
The best – and only – guarantee of freedom that we the living can provide for our progeny is the solid foundation devised 229 years ago by the likes of Madison, Hamilton, Jefferson, Mason and others. The U.S. Constitution has certainly stood the test of time and thus should be preserved and defended by all, including the U.S. Supreme Court.
To this end, Neil Gorsuch should be confirmed by the U.S. Senate as the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.
Southern Maine Patriots