The Pros And Cons Of Constitutional Interpretation

Words: 966
Pages: 4

The United States Constitution preludes, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice…promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves…do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America”. The United States Constitution, a rhetorical masterpiece, even in its preamble contains a text that to this day is debated among the greats minds in the Judiciary. Questions emerge as to what is the meaning of Justice? Whose general welfare is to be promoted? And what type of liberty must be secured? These are the questions that have been debated since the Constitutions inception for which multiple avenues of interpretation can arise. This essay will first discuss a variety of methods for Constitutional interpretation, such as Originalism, Constitutional Fidelity, as well as Judicial Restraint and Judicial Activism. Secondly, this essay will analyze the role and …show more content…
Madison was the first instance by which the Supreme Court exercised the doctrine of judicial review. This means the laws enacted by the two other branches of government, the executive and legislative, are subject to review by the judicial branch as a check to ensure the preservation of the Constitution and the rights it guarantees to the American people. Although it is not specifically stated as a power for the Supreme Court in the Constitution, the power of judicial review has become an integral part of constitutional interpretation for Supreme Court justices. As the late Chief Justice Warren Burger said, “the doctrine of judicial review, as announced by Chief Justice John Marshall in 1803 in Marbury v. Madison, is likely to remain part of the American system…Marshall was the one who recognized the need to enunciate the doctrine as part of Federal Jurisprudence and seized the first opportunity to assert the power of the Court to measure an act of Congress by the yardstick of the