Liberals use Constitutional 'interpretation'...<quoted text>
You may be right, Terri, about Jefferson's wariness of the constitution. If he did write : "It is every Americans' right and obligation to read and interpret the
Constitution for himself", that could be interpreted two ways, one of them a warning, no?
to marginalize original intent
Liberals have used various means to minimize and marginalize the original intent of the Framers of the U.S. Constitution. A common method is to suggest that the meaning of the Constitution is 'open to interpretation.'
Thus, the Left has convinced a gullible public that ordinary citizens need lawyers educated at Leftwing law schools to tell us what the Constitution means. And, if the Supreme Court is packed with Leftwing revisionists who give little regard to original intent, then the decisions rendered by the court will be a far cry from the philosophy of liberty espoused by the Framers.
Thomas Jefferson said,
"On every question of construction, let us carry ourselves back to the
time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested
in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out
of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in
which it was passed."
Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, June 12, 1823, The
Complete Jefferson, p. 322.
In this simple, straightforward statement, Jefferson lays out the ONLY legitimate method of understanding the meaning of the Constitution--go back to the Framers' own words and consider original intent. Every other method is illegitimate, flawed, and highly dangerous.
Jefferson also stated that 'it is every Americans' right and obligation to read and interpret the Constitution for himself.'
The following video, The Liberty Sphere Report for 4/15/2010, delineates this concept more fully and explains the critical ramifications of the courts to place 'precedent' over original intent.