LETTER: Originalism and the Constitution
BJ Soper looks at a copy of the U.S. Constitution. (Washington Post photo by Matt McClain)
In her recent letter, Linda Clocks left out one point about “originalism.” She said that women and slaves weren’t protected in the Constitution and asked whether those laws should be enforced today. But she ignores that the Constitution was changed through an amendment process. If people want to argue that laws should be written based on a “living Constitution,” then what’s the point of having an amendment process?
