I Cannot Live Without My Life, I Cannot Life Without My Soul: Law Edition

I Cannot Live Without My Life, I Cannot Life Without My Soul: Law Edition

The Founding Fathers could foresee a clash between state and federal government, but they did not anticipate a technological revolution; Would it be fair to say that the Constitution is lacking in modernization, or should society format itself according to the Law of the Land?

The Constitution is the most important piece of legislation for the United States (maybe coming second only to the Declaration of Independence). Over the years, it has come to have a total of 27 Amendments that each citizen abides by. While some of these Amendments seem frivolous such as Amendment 18, there’s a reason that each Amendment is in a piece of legislation called the “Law of the Land.” However, as years continue to pass and innovations continue to develop, there is a question that is at the forefront of law interpretation: is the Constitution “outdated?”

Now, absolutely, the Constitution is not something to challenge without a strong sense of confidence and ability to make the case. But, that doesn’t mean it isn’t something to at least consider, especially in the midst of a technological revolution. Each day, there is something new in the works that no one has heard of; it has become clear that there is no finite point of “inventing everything that will ever be invented.” There are a lot of topics not discussed in the Constitution which can be seen two ways: strict and loose, which intertwine with both modernist and originalist theory. With strict interpretation from a federal standpoint, one can look at a document and say “the issue at hand is not discussed here; therefore, the decision should be left to the states or individuals to decide for themselves.” In a loose sense, any issue can be seen in such a light that it may not be discussed or formally laid out, so there is nothing that says a federal government can’t establish laws for it. In other words, originalist theory supporters like the thought of interpreting the Constitution as it was meant to be interpreted, while modernist theory supporters argue that the Constitution should be interpreted and dealt with pertaining to a contemporary sense.

There’s also the notion that the Constitution was written by a select group of people for a select group of people. This is a contributing factor as to why there are amendments like 14, 15, and 19. So, in alignment with modernist constitutional theory and originalist theory as well as interpretation, a grand question could amount to the following: should there be a bigger push for more amendments as we progress as a society or should the Constitution stay framed as is currently is and leave the rest up to the states?

If the Constitution is left as it stands in original theory, this could lead to a lot of discontent among citizens, as there are no universal laws for something like healthcare. This could drive more migration among people and really mess up state economies. If someone is in dire need of better healthcare and does not receive it from a state or a private company in a way that can suit them, what other choice is there than to move to somewhere else to increase that person’s standard of living?

However, with modernist theory, some feel as if that could be overruling a document so important that it has carried a nation for over 200 years. Also, with too much government intervention, it can lead some citizens to feel as if they don’t really have a say in what happens because the government will do what it wants anyway. Why would I vote on healthcare if the government won’t listen to my voice? (Another reason to always call your representatives and vote: they need to hear your voice). Not to mention, specifically with healthcare, there could be virtually only one standard of care and the very idea of caring for someone would be very different than what it is now in the U.S., as seen in England.

Personally, I feel like that the Amendment process is so difficult for a reason, but I think it’s worth it to try and continue to add to it. The ERA should have been passed in its time, but it did not; if people still feel as if those same injustices still exist today, then by all means, do what you can to reintroduce it and fight for it. I understand the originalist thought and the want to leave the choice up to the states, but I also think that could get messy, especially for people who live on state borders/ people who live in a town with half in one state and the other half in another. It could create a lot of problems to have varying rules upon varying states, so I think government intervention in the sense of setting at least a minimum standard for each state is good.

While I feel as if people should truly petition for another Amendment if their heart so desires, I don’t necessarily think it’s the first place to start. There’s got to be an outstanding problem where one can gather a consensus from other peers in order to bolster a movement and fight back. Sometimes, Amendments don’t have to do the trick and passing legislation for an Act can.

Originalist theory and modernist theory are two polar opposites, but carry an illustrative point that it’s important to understand what the pros and cons are of government intervention, as well as whose rights among all citizens would be impacted the most. They also carry the point to not only pay attention to the politics of it all, but to also be sure one understands what’s happening in the Supreme Court and who exactly is in charge there, as well as some of the lower courts. Judge decisions should not be decided on a personal agenda, but rather an honest judgment and examination of what exactly the impact of one law can carry.

Cover Image Credit: Ted Eytan, Wikimedia

Popular Right Now

6 Things You Should Know About The Woman Who Can't Stand Modern Feminism

Yes, she wants to be heard too.


2018 is sort of a trap for this woman. She believes in women with all of the fire inside of her, but it is hard for her to offer support when people are making fools of themselves and disguising it as feminism.

The fact of the matter is that women possess qualities that men don't and men possess qualities that women don't. That is natural. Plus, no one sees men parading the streets in penis costumes complaining that they don't get to carry their own fetus for nine months.

1. She really loves and values women.

She is incredibly proud to be a woman.

She knows the amount of power than a woman's presence alone can hold. She sees when a woman walks into a room and makes the whole place light up. She begs that you won't make her feel like a "lady hater" because she doesn't want to follow a trend that she doesn't agree with.

2. She wants equality, too

She has seen the fundamental issues in the corporate world, where women and men are not receiving equal pay.

She doesn't cheer on the businesses that don't see women and men as equivalents. But she does recognize that if she works her butt off, she can be as successful as she wants to.

3. She wears a bra.

While she knows the "I don't have to wear a bra for society" trend isn't a new one, but she doesn't quite get it. Like maybe she wants to wear a bra because it makes her feel better. Maybe she wears a bra because it is the normal things to do... And that's OK.

Maybe she wants to put wear a lacy bra and pretty makeup to feel girly on .a date night. She is confused by the women who claim to be "fighting for women," because sometimes they make her feel bad for expressing her ladyhood in a different way than them.

4. She hates creeps just as much as you do. .

Just because she isn't a feminist does not mean that she is cool with the gruesome reality that 1 in 5 women are sexually abused.

In fact, this makes her stomach turn inside out to think about. She knows and loves people who have been through such a tragedy and wants to put the terrible, creepy, sexually charged criminals behind bars just as bad as the next woman.

Remember that just because she isn't a feminist doesn't mean she thinks awful men can do whatever they want.

5. There is a reason she is ashamed of 2018's version of feminism.

She looks at women in history who have made a difference and is miserably blown away by modern feminism's performance.

Not only have women in the past won themselves the right to vote, but also the right to buy birth control and have credit cards in their names and EVEN saw marital rape become a criminal offense.

None of them dressed in vagina costumes to win anyone over though... Crazy, right?

6. She isn't going to dress in a lady parts costume to prove a point.

This leaves her speechless. It is like the women around her have absolutely lost their minds and their agendas, only lessening their own credibility.

"Mom, what are those ladies on TV dressed up as?"

"Ummm... it looks to me like they are pink taco's honey."

She loves who she is and she cherished what makes her different from the men around her. She doesn't want to compromise who she is as a woman just so she can be "equal with men."

Related Content

Connect with a generation
of new voices.

We are students, thinkers, influencers, and communities sharing our ideas with the world. Join our platform to create and discover content that actually matters to you.

Learn more Start Creating

We May Have Seen The Beginning Of The Blue Wave, But Our Fight Isn't Over

Here's what's next after the midterms.


On Tuesday night, Democrats secured over 30 seats in the House of Representatives, giving them control over that chamber of Congress. While some were hoping for more, disappointed by losses in the Texas Senate race and in the Florida and Georgia gubernatorial races, this victory means a definitive end to dangerous Republican legislation affecting underserved groups. Now, the family separation agenda will be stopped in its tracks, the administration's anti-transgender policy won't be carried out, and gun regulation has a chance at making it to the floor.

We also saw many historic milestones, with many politicians being the first person of their gender, race, ethnicity or sexual orientation to be elected to their positions. For example, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will be the youngest woman ever elected to the House, Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar will be the first Muslim women in Congress, and Sharice Davids and Deb Haaland will be the first Native American women. Many states such as Maine and South Dakota ushered in their first-ever female governors this week, and Jared Polis broke barriers by winning in Colorado to become the first openly gay man elected governor.

The results of the midterms won't fix everything, though. Flipping the House was one of the most important things that could be done to make sure that this administration doesn't pass any more racially-charged policies, but we still need to continue to organize and demonstrate on a national level in order to make sure that the interests of the people are protected. Stacey Abrams is still contesting the results of her election in Georgia, but we can't forget that the state Republican party went out of their way to suppress black voters that likely would have voted for her.

Her districts were gerrymandered beyond recognition, as were those of many other states, and municipal elections saw historic amounts of illegal purges of voter rolls. This means that we need to press our representatives to ensure the integrity of our democracy before going forward to 2020, be that through appointing independent committees to draw district lines or doing away with discriminatory voter ID laws, especially within the state of North Carolina.

Also, while midterm voter turnout was at a 50-year high, the Democratic strategy to encourage voters in their party to show up at the polls was lacking. A lot of the onus was put on communities of color that have a history of being ignored by politicians after they gain their initial support, but there was little to no attempt by liberals to reach across the aisle to conservative voters, leading to things like the Texas election being determined by some 71% of white men and 59% of white women who voted for Ted Cruz.

There are political lessons to be learned from the midterms, but above all, we need to remember to not become complacent now that conditions have potentially improved. Activist groups will almost definitely be working as hard as ever, and we should join them as they continue to resist oppressive forces in our democracy and fight for those who have no voice in our current system. There will be a time to rest, and we'll know it when we reach it, but for now, we can't get lazy.

Related Content

Facebook Comments