Liberal Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg Downplays Constitution’s Importance and Conservative Blogosphere Rumbles, Justice Scalia Does the Same and You Can Hear A Cricket Scratch His Balls a Mile Away

We the People - U.S. ConstitutionShould the Constitution be interpreted differently as time goes on, or should we apply it as if it were just written?

 

We the People - U.S. Constitution

Should the Constitution be interpreted differently as time goes on, or should we apply it as if it were just written?


It is amazing how fast some conservative pundits can become Constitutional Originalists when it is convenient for them to distract from the GOP primary circus.

During an interview in Egypt, Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg responded to a question about if the Egyptian people should look to the U.S. Constitution when attempting to draft their own (emphasis mine):

You should certainly be aided by all the constitution-writing that has gone one since the end of World War II. I would not look to the US constitution, if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012. I might look at the constitution of South Africa. That was a deliberate attempt to have a fundamental instrument of government that embraced basic human rights, had an independent judiciary… It really is, I think, a great piece of work that was done. Much more recent than the US constitution – Canada has a Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It dates from 1982. You would almost certainly look at the European Convention on Human Rights. Yes, why not take advantage of what there is elsewhere in the world?

 

 

The angry backlash from the right was severe, including calls for her resignation.  The Daily Caller called Ginsburg out for ‘dissing’ the Constitution.  Ginsburg’s stance on the Constitution mirrors that of a recent article in the New York Times about its slipping status as an inspiration for more recent constitutions around the world. Perhaps surprisingly to some, she is not the only Justice who feels this way.

 

Conservative leaning Justice Scalia seems to have his own reservations in regard to the Constitution.

 

 

Associate Justice Antonin Scalia’s remarks on the U.S. Constitution (emphasis mine):

The bill of rights of the former evil empire, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, was much better than ours. I mean it literally. It was much better. We guarantee freedom of speech and of the press, big deal! The guaranteed freedom of speech, of the press of street demonstrations and anyone who is caught trying to suppress criticism of the government will be called to account.

Meanwhile, the critics of Ginsburg are nowhere to be heard. The cognitive dissonance from this crowd is mind boggling.

About the Author

Jason Parker