DHS Lawyer Who Asked To Be Held in Contempt Leaves Minnesota Detail
Another Nurse Tells Us There's No Such Thing as a Good Nurse Who...
Unhinged Leftist Says When Dems Regain Power, ICE Agents Won’t Live to See...
Colombian National Used Stolen Identity to Vote and Receive $400,000 in Federal Benefits
Why Florida's English-Only Driver's Test Policy Is a Win for Everyone ... Except...
Asylum Hearing for Family Whose 5-Year-Old Was ‘Arrested’ by ICE Expedited, Left Complains
3 Doors Down Frontman Brad Arnold Has Died After a Battle With Cancer
Woman With Autism Testifies She Wasn’t Trying to Interfere With ICE, Which Brought...
Arrested Student Ties Don Lemon to Organization of Church Disruption
Mob of Liberal White Women Demand Minneapolis Yoga Studio Do Something About ICE
Chuck Schumer FINALLY Rendered Speechless When Cornered About His 'Jim Crow' ID Laws...
Minneapolis Police Tear Down More Anti-ICE Barricades
Another Shutdown Looms & The AMA Caves On Gender Surgery
Olympic ‘Women’s’ Boxing ‘Champion’ Imane Khelif Admits the Obvious And Conservatives Take...
Mike Eruzione Has Advice for Olympic Snowboarder With Mixed Emotions About Representing th...

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

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement