Social Question

saint's avatar

Is it better to amend the Constitution according to Article 5, or just sort of ignore it or interpret it according to temporal whim?

Asked by saint (3967 points ) October 17th, 2011

The methods described in Article 5 are tough to accomplish, and one of those methods has never been used (I think).
It has been more expedient in the last several decades to simply ignore the Constitution, or find hidden meaning in the Articles. One way or the other, the role of government is influenced.
There are probably undesirable consequences either way.
Which is better?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

4 Answers

marinelife's avatar

How has the Constitution been ignored?

YoBob's avatar

Hmm… I’m not aware of any amendments to the constitution that have been made without following the processes outlined in Article 5. Do you have a specific example in mind?

Jaxk's avatar

I assume you’re referring to Judicial Activism. The most obvious example I know of is Wickard v. Filburn. This allowed the federal government to regulate crops grown for personal consumption under the Interstate Commerce clause. They ruled that if he didn’t grow it himself, he would have had to buy it, therfore it affected Interstate Commerce. A major expansion of federal power into our lives.

I would much rather see an amendment if the federal government is going to expand it’s power. That way we at least know what they’re doing.

HungryGuy's avatar

“How has the Constitution been ignored?”

Let’s start with censorship. This business of community standards is just an excuse by politicos to impose their religion on everyone and ban speech which offends their religious dogma.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther