Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Originalism and Non-Originalism. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
A 3 page paper which examines originalism and on-originalism as it involves the Constitution of the United States of America. Bibliography lists 2 sources.
Page Count:
3 pages (~225 words per page)
File: JR7_RAorism.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
from the nation created by the founding fathers more than 200 years ago. Since the writing of the Constitution many changes have occurred in society and in the world in
general. In the interpretation of the Constitution there are many schools of thought and they generally fall under the theories of originalism and non-originalism. The following paper examines both and
then discusses how while originalism is important, non-originalism is necessary due to the changes in the nation that the forefathers could not have perceived. Originalism and Non-Originalism In
best understanding the differences between the two, one author points out 8 reasons to believe in originalism and 8 reasons to believe in non-origiinalism. One reason to side with originalism
relies on the belief that it will reduce any "likelihood that unelected judges will seize the reigns of power from elected representatives" and that the authority of the court will
be better preserved through originalism, at least in the long run (Theories of Constitutional Interpretation, 2008). Such thought also argues that in non-originalism a judge can have too much personal
power in relationship to interpretation of the Constitution (Theories of Constitutional Interpretation, 2008). Another possibility is that when one leaves "it to the people to amend their Constitution when need
be" this "promotes serious public debate about government and its limitations" (Theories of Constitutional Interpretation, 2008). In essence, relying on originalism allows the basic structure of the Constitution to remain
intact and to serve as the powerful foundation of how rules are made in the nation. In terms of the other side the same author offers the argument that,
"The framers at the Convention in Philadelphia indicated that they did not want their specific intentions to control interpretation" (Theories of Constitutional Interpretation, 2008). Another argument revolves around the fact
...