1. Constitutional 'originalism' is a lot of malarkey. Conservatism is one thing. Originalism defies reason to the point of buffoonery and fails to mask a partisan agenda. Take the 2A - if we're not going to acknowledge sociocultural change, then it should only apply to muskets.
2. Does that seem silly? It's how any reasonable person during the time of the framing of the Constitution would have interpreted it - which is at the core of originalism. Cultural advancement, technological advancement, geographical growth, population explosions - social change.
3. To assume the Constitution as a document is robust enough to require no alteration in the face of all these factors is, frankly, ridiculous. Yet here we are considering yet another 'originalist' to add to the Supreme Court.
4. Our founders were intelligent and courageous, but they were informed by a world view that is incomparable to our own - not in terms of the basis of a free and democratic country, but in the details of how it functions, who it includes and who it protects.
5. I can only imagine the awe they would feel to see the country that America would become, and, no doubt, the shame at our struggles and mistakes as we've maneuvered through our social, cultural and political evolution. Growth, by necessity, requires adaptation.
