GEN

A former publication from Medium about politics, power, and culture. Currently inactive and not taking submissions.

Follow publication

Member-only story

The New New

It’s Time for a Progressive Reading of the Constitution

Conservatives have claimed the moral high ground of so-called originalism. Liberals need to put forward their own vision.

Erwin Chemerinsky
GEN
Published in
6 min readNov 7, 2018

Photo: Bettmann/Getty

FFor five decades, conservatives have claimed the moral high ground in judicial matters, claiming that they are simply interpreting the Constitution as it was written by our Founding Fathers — what they call an originalist approach. But conservative justices’ decisions are no less shaped by their worldview than progressives’.

In 2008, for instance, for the first time in U.S. history, the five conservative justices on the Roberts court declared a local gun control ordinance to be unconstitutional — a violation of the Second Amendment. In 2010, these same justices found that corporations have the right to spend unlimited amounts of money in election campaigns. In 2013, they invalidated a federal civil rights law in the area of race — a key provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 — for the first time since the 19th century.

By any measure, all these cases were based on the ideology and values of the conservative Republican justices, not the text or the original meaning of the Constitution. It is laughable to say that the framers of the First Amendment intended that corporations should be able to spend unrestricted sums from their campaign treasuries to get candidates elected or defeated. Those who wrote the First Amendment did not envision campaign spending as it exists today, let alone modern corporations. Additionally, each decision-overruled precedent invalidated a law that was enacted with overwhelming support, broadly decided a matter when a narrow ruling was possible, and did so to advance conservative political values.

It’s time for progressives to fight back by offering an alternative vision of constitutional interpretation and constitutional law based on fulfilling the Constitution’s promise of liberty and justice for all. Progressives need to expose how conservatives are using the Constitution to advance their own agenda, which favors business over consumers and employees and government power over individual rights.

The place to start is at the very beginning

Create an account to read the full story.

The author made this story available to Medium members only.
If you’re new to Medium, create a new account to read this story on us.

Or, continue in mobile web

Already have an account? Sign in

GEN
GEN

Published in GEN

A former publication from Medium about politics, power, and culture. Currently inactive and not taking submissions.

Erwin Chemerinsky
Erwin Chemerinsky

Written by Erwin Chemerinsky

Erwin Chemerinsky is the 13th Dean of UC Berkeley, School of Law and the Jesse H. Choper Distinguished Professor of Law.

Responses (33)

Write a response

If the framers of the Constitution expected future generations to stick closely to original intent they would have produced a document that was a heck of a lot more detailed and specific. But realizing that they could not predict the future they…

--

Tom Gregg, oh good gravy. I really think you’re missing the point of the post. It is precisely because the ideals of the preamble are subjective and aspirational that we should elevate them in our discourse about the constitution. It is in those…

--

As Thomas Jefferson expressed many times, “Life is for the living.” He expressly used that phrase to nullify the idea that any current generation is utterly constrained by what previous generations thought and said about anything. Sure, we need to…

--