One of the dirty tricks preached progressive leftist Democrats and their friends in academia is the evil notion that the U.S. Constitution is a “living breathing document.”
It’s a scheme for leftists to amend the U.S. Constitution without having to bother getting support to amend the Supreme Law of the Land. We currently have 27 amendments to the Constitution because it can be changed — a provision America’s brilliant Founding Fathers established so that it could be amended.
But sleazy leftists like U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein don’t want to go through the amendment process. Instead, they like to have leftist judges change the meaning of the written word in order to advance their anti-American communist agenda against the people’s wishes.
For example, they don’t like that words like “shall not be infringed” in the Second Amendment still mean “shall not be infringed,” despite the tireless attempts of activists judges trying to redefine those powerfully clear words.
Case in point was Feinstein on Monday during the confirmation hearing for Supreme Court justice nominee Judge Neil Gorsuch, where she browbeat the esteemed judge for his “originalist” judicial philosophy, a philosophy that means the definition of words are fixed in nature and can’t be changed willy-nilly because of fluctuating human passions or whims of judges.
“This is personal, but I find this originalist judicial philosophy to be really troubling,” Feinstein barked on Monday. “I firmly believe the American Constitution is a living document intended to evolve as our country evolves,” she grunted.
Feinstein went on to embarrassingly shoot her argument down by pointing by arguing that schools would still be segregated and women would not be allowed to vote under an originalist view when in actuality, only activist judges could have read in the original Constitution about women not being allowed to vote by changing the meaning of words or making things up.
But leftists like to find things like the “right” for women to murder their babies in the Constitution as long as judges make a ruling, despite what the written words say.
Ironically, Feinstein further argued that Gorsuch would overturn Roe v. Wade, a horrific judicial decision that invented the right to murder babies in the Constitution, even though the Constitution says nothing about abortion.
Using Feinstein’s living breathing document nonsense, couldn’t Gorsuch just say that the Constitution forbids abortion? Maybe she’d like to retract her words.