No one with authority

The "living document" argument for the U.S. Constitution falls apart when one realizes that the courts derive their power from the original meaning of the Constitution. If the Constitution is constantly shifting in meaning, who is to say the justices are still the arbiters of where that meaning has shifted?

Surely the role of the judicial branch has shifted. Why leave it to the branch itself to tell us anything? If we throw out the original meaning of the Constitution because it's so old, we are left without anyone in authority.

Ryan Larsen

Bountiful