Our country was created - designed - to be ruled by laws and not by men. At the foundation of all the country's laws is the Constitution of the United States. As citizens, and the voters or future voters of this country, we need to be aware of what these documents mean and how they impact our government and society, as well as the lives of our families and friends. Only after we understand the laws on which our government is based can we knowledgeably defend our freedoms against undue intrusion.
Of course, not everyone interprets the Constitution in the same way. Some choose to interpret it according to the intent of the framers, the men who created our government in the first place. Others interpret the Constitution as a "living document" whose meaning should be altered in consideration of the changing times to give broad power to the federal government.
The only correct way of interpretation is the framers' intent method. Our country needs to return to the moral system of government created by the founders, and understanding the Constitution in light of the intent of the men who wrote it would certainly be a step in the right direction. Otherwise, we will continue on the road to more government interference, government "nannying", in the lives of individuals and families. In illustration of this concept, consider the following example:
The country's framers intended for the federal government to be one of enumerated, or clearly defined, powers, not large, unrestricted powers. They planned for the remaining power to go to the respective state governments, or to the people. This view was later set into law as the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. James Madison, known as the "Father of the Constitution" addressed this subject in No. 45 of the Federalist Papers. He stated:
The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.
According to the Constitution, and this quote of Madison's, the powers of the federal government are very limited indeed. People who believe in interpretation based on framers' intent would hold that the federal government has jurisdiction only over the areas assigned to it by the Constitution (technically, this view of government authority is called the doctrine of "enumerated powers"). Obviously, present day government theory is not generally based on this concept. Federal government now regulates public schools, speed limits on interstate highways, child-care, health care, and small businesses. This practice stems from the second kind of constitutional interpretation, which begins with the opinion that the government has broad power over the lives of citizens, and utilizes parts of the Constitution that can, in some way, be supposed to grant this power.
One constitutional clause which has, in the recent past, been construed to grant arguably unconstitutional authority is the Commerce Clause. This clause, found in Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution, gives Congress the power "[t]o regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes." It is by that over two-hundred-year-old sentence fragment that Congress justifies its regulation of those things mentioned above: public schools, child-care, health care, etc.
The magnitude of this widely accepted interpretation of the Commerce Clause is explained by Michael Farris, president of the Home School Legal Defense Association, in this quote from his book Constitutional Law for Christian Students:
Congress now takes a very broad view of its power to regulate interstate commerce. For example, Congress takes the position that if a business uses a bank which does business in more than one state (and they all do) then the business is engaged in interstate commerce and Congress can, therefore, regulate the business. If a store owner buys any goods from another state for resale, then that store owner is engaged in interstate commerce. The reality is that everyone in America today is engaged in interstate commerce by this broad, modern interpretation.
You can probably see how this "broad" and "modern" method of constitutional interpretation could lead to undue government involvement in many, possibly all areas of life. And as long as the public does not understand where government policy originates and how it has changed, for better or for worse, over the years, the federal government can continue to usurp our freedoms.
With this in mind, it is wise for all citizens to read the Constitution, to interpret it according to the intent of the framers as expressed by their writings, and also, their actions. In the words of Chief Justice Burger in the Supreme Court case Marsh v. Chambers, "[T]heir actions reveal their intent." Analyze new legislation and judicial decisions according to this legal basis, and identify the kind of constitutional interpretation used by the individuals or organizations involved. In so doing, you will not only be able to understand so much more of what is really behind many legislation-related disputes, you will also be able to skillfully defend your own freedoms with strong arguments firmly rooted in the supreme law of the land.
Emily Younger is Vice-president and Director of Constitutional Studies at the Center for American Freedom.
