Explore BrainMass
Share

Approaches to the Constitutional interpretation

This content was STOLEN from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

Answer the following with 200 words or more based on the Four Approaches to the Constitutional Interpretation listed below:
1.) Clear Meaning, 2.) Adaptation 3.) Original Intent 4.) Structuralism

a. Which approach best characterizes Justice Stevens' opinion of the Court in U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton (1995)? Explain.
b. Which approach best characterizes Justice Thomas's dissent in the same case? Explain.

A central issue in constitutional politics involves whether the authority granted in Article II exhausts the powers of the President. To what extent does the President enjoy inherent powers and extraordinary powers in times of emergency? Scholars disagree on this important question. Discuss the theories of presidential power. Discuss the Supreme Court's acceptance or rejection of these theories by relying on cases that were discussed in this unit. Be specific. To which theory (or theories) has the Supreme Court subscribed, and why? To which theory (or theories) did the Framers probably subscribe, and why?

In his dissent in Baker v. Carr, Justice Frankfurter denounced the majority for "asserting destructively novel judicial power" in its decision. What did Frankfurter mean? What alternative remedy did Frankfurter offer in his dissent for those aggrieved voters who had brought this case? Explain.

Explain how Baker v. Carr and Shaw v. Reno, which are viewed as landmarks in establishing a cause of action under the Fourteenth Amendment, are analogous. With what objections from dissenters did Justices Brennan and O'Connor have to contend in their respective majority opinions?

© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 25, 2018, 8:51 am ad1c9bdddf
https://brainmass.com/law/constitutional-law/approaches-constitutional-interpretation-554554

Solution Preview

Answer the following with 200 words or more based on the Four Approaches to the Constitutional Interpretation listed below:

1.) Clear Meaning, 2.) Adaptation 3.) Original Intent 4.) Structuralism

Structuralism in its truest form is predicated upon an interpretation of the constitution wherein those who advocate this interpretation of the constitution focus on how the Constitution and its writers appropriated the structures of government. The overall arrangement of offices, powers, and relationships are used to justify adherence to these roles in their original intent as intended by the founders. Federalism, separation of powers, and democracy are some of the structural principals advocated by those that ascribe to this interpretation.

Original intent and structuralism have many commonalities as those who believe in original intent seek to interpret the constitution under the paradigms of the framers of the constitution in its original intent. Contemporary writings of the framers, newspaper articles, the Federalist Papers, and any documentation to support their interpretation from the Constitutional Convention itself are used to justify interpreting the constitution in the opinion of the framers of the document as their intent for the most part is well documented.

Adaptation is interpreting the constitution under the living document paradigm wherein the constitution is seen as an ever evolving document that adapts with time in regard to the different social norms, societal issues, and injustices that mandate a reinterpretation of the original document. Therefore, it is flexible and must be kept in accordance with the social realities of the era as the constitution is a protean document whose meaning isn't fixed but variable and adaptable.

Clear meaning is similar to original intent and structuralism as those who cite any of these three for justification of their interpretation state that the Framers of the original document CLEARLY documented what they meant for the constitution. Therefore, any questions that arise over how the document should be applied should be interpreted through what the Framers of the document clearly stated and meant through their well-documented writings.

a. Which approach best characterizes Justice Stevens' opinion of the Court in U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton (1995)? Explain. ...

Solution Summary

The approaches to the constitutional interpretations are given.

$2.19
See Also This Related BrainMass Solution

The Constitution And The Original Meaning

This week we examined two different ways of interpreting the Constitution. Using one or the other as a basis, make a case for or against the constitutionality of Roe v. Wade. State clearly from the beginning which school of thought you are flowing, then take a position, and finally show how your school of thought on constitutional interpretation informs a position you will take on retaining or overturning Roe v. Wade.
Remember - and I'll restate it here - this is not so much a paper on the restriction of abortion as it is a paper using constitutional interpretation as a method to justify a positon on Roe v. Wade, one way or the other.

In addition to the arguments on original meaning in the text book, read and use the Unit 3, 3.2 on the restriction of abortion. Your paper needs to be a minimum of 500 words. Use APA standards. You may not use Wikipedia for a source.

2 references

View Full Posting Details