‘If I Steal a Wallet in Japan,’ Justice KBJ Argues That Makes Her...
Ron DeSantis Is Not a Boomer: FL Gov Drops Common Sense on Worthless...
Harmeet Dhillon and Others Weigh in As Dems Hyperventilate About Trump's SCOTUS Visit
Trump Stares Down Liberal Justices As Ketanji Brown Jackson Cracks Under Pressure
The Christian School Movement of the 1970s
Whitney Cummings Admits She's Diagnosed Crazy, Then Proves It by Claiming Trump Runs...
'So Effing Effed': Nevada Dem Rep. Susie Lee Drops Vulgar Meltdown Over Trump...
WaPo Joins Lib Media Hacks Circling the Wagons in Attempt to Make Eric...
Congrats, Justice Jackson! Even Sotomayor and Kagan Think You’re the Dumbest One Now
Judicial Activism Run Amok: Obama Judge Orders Trump to Make Illegals Legal Again...
Dems Say Trump's Shattering Political Norms and Trying to Intimidate SCOTUS Justices
The 1962 Supreme Court Decision That Banned School Prayer
Sen. Amy Klobuchar Tries to Take a Jab at Trump Over Gas Prices...
'Stupid, Narcissistic Idiot': Victor Davis Hanson Recalls His Own Fang Fang Story to...
Eric Swalwell Runs to MS NOW and Claims the FBI Dropping Fang Fang...

Now the Constitution Is Dangerous and We Need a New One

Twitchy

We're old enough to remember when President Barack Obama admitted that he wanted gun control, but he was "constrained" by the Constitution. At the Democratic National Convention, Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson said that we need to "reimagine" democracy as something "more revolutionary than what our founders put down on that little piece of paper." Just yesterday, MSNBC's Chris Hayes said the Electoral College was "a national suicide pact."

Advertisement

The Constitution sure keeps getting in the way of what Democrats want to do. That's why it's not surprising that the New York Times is entertaining the idea that the Constitution is dangerous.

Jennifer Szalai writes in a review of USC Berkeley Law School Dean Erwin Chemerinsky's new book, "No Democracy Lasts Forever":

Originalists, as these scholars call themselves, say they are simply reacting to decades of “overreach” by “activist” judges. Liberal critics counter that interpreting the law according to what the founders (supposedly) wanted amounts to an end run around protecting and promoting a multiracial democracy. The attorney and columnist Madiba K. Dennie argues that originalists’ canny use of apolitical language ensnares liberals into treating originalism as coherent jurisprudence, even when it functions more like an “ideology.” Far from encouraging “judicial restraint,” she writes in “The Originalism Trap,” originalism is much more effective in “restraining judges from doing good things.”

Advertisement

Define "good things."

Chemerinsky stopped by MSNBC's "Morning Joe" to promote his book and argue that America needs a new Constitution:

"… is undermining democracy."

This is the dean of Berkeley's law school.

Advertisement

Excellent point.

You're probably not getting your way 100 percent of the time.

Advertisement

This is another one of those issues that's become partisan. You never hear Republicans calling for a "reimagining" of the Constitution; it's always Democrats who want to scrap all the founding documents and start from scratch (to enshrine Marxism).

***

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos