"That's the argument of flexibility and it goes something like this: The Constitution is over 200 years old and societies change. It has to change with society, like a living organism, or it will become brittle and break." "But you would have to be an idiot to believe that," Scalia said. "The Constitution is not a living organism, it is a legal document. It says something and doesn't say other things."
Scalia completely misses the boat on this. He seems to think that this is an either/or proposition. It is not. The founding fathers did not consider wiretaps when they were writing it, and the Constitution says nothing about them, so there is no "originalist" opinion on the matter. Yet they have consistently been ruled on under the search and seizure clause. I also suppose this means Scalia is pro-slavery since that's in there too. Sorry Tony, your intelectual position doesn't hold water. Scalia Dismisses 'Living Constitution' - Yahoo! News |