Originalism

Former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer, during a keynote speech at an ACS event examining corporations' influence on the federal courts, said that progressives have been far too passive in the debate over the meaning and reach of the U.S. Constitution. Spitzer called the Constitution a "wildly progressive document," and urged progressives to stop being silent about the richness and vitality of the nation's governing document.

"I think we are about to lose the Constitution," Spitzer said at the Feb. 8 "Federal Courts, Inc.?," event. "I don't mean in some dramatic way, like it's going to be ripped away from us. But I do mean, just as we lost the conversation about what government should do, just as we lost the ability to speak with pride and vigor and define what a government can do for our communities, because we failed to make a counter argument, we are losing the narrative about the Constitution, because we are letting the other side claim it."

Spitzer continued:

The Constitution is a wildly progressive document. It is an amazing thing. We all appreciate that. But our failure to stand up and defend it permits them to claim it. This charade of reading an edited version of the Constitution on the floor of the Congress, as though some how the parts of it we don't like didn't exist, as though somehow therefore they can have both an originalist interpretation, but ignore the originalist pieces they don't like; I mean the internal incoherence of what they do is so palpable. And yet we don't stand up and push back and say ‘Shame on you, stop, read it, see that there were warts in this document, see that it has grown, see how wonderful it is, and understand it because it has a dynamic and has grown to show us where society can go. We're quiet. I would have loved to see the president push back on that - in the State of the Union. I would have love to see him say ‘I want to read the Constitution to you, and explain to you what it means, and how it grows.'

Spitzer also said that timid progressives don't help the cause by backing enlightened judicial nominees, while urging them to keep silent on what makes the governing document a progressive one.

"Where are we when ... folks we know who are nominated for the bench - their testimony is painful," he said. "I would love to see somebody stand up say, ‘Yes, I do believe the Constitution needs to be interpreted in a more creative way, based upon what society is. Do you believe slaves should still exist?'"

Spitzer concluded that far-right rhetoric can and should be boldly countered.

"This is a document that reflects society," he said. "It pains me that we are losing the Constitution because we are unwilling to stand up and defend what it really is. We have to do that. That is what this organization is about. Be loud, grab the loudest megaphone you can find, and use it."

Video of highlights from Spitzer's keynote address is available here or by clicking on the picture.

In a piece for The Huffington Post, Fredrickson (pictured) notes that the nation is in the midst of a moment that "offers a tremendous opportunity to ensure that lawmakers, and all Americans, become more familiar with the genius and richness of our Constitution. No group or person has or should have the ability to corner the market on constitutional interpretation."

But Bachmann's first "Conservative Constitutional" gathering featured Justice Antonin Scalia, suggesting the congresswoman is far from interested in advancing a broad discussion of the Constitution. Instead, Fredrickson says Bachmann is all about promoting the Tea Party's limited embrace of the Constitution.

Fredrickson writes:

That cramped version of the Constitution envisions a founding document frozen in time and incapable of applying to today's society, and the many changes our nation has gone through. Indeed this week's first conservative constitution class featured Justice Antonin Scalia, a leading proponent of "originalism," a philosophy that says the Constitution should be read and applied in precisely the manner as the framers would intend, without considering the changes to our society. Originalism is a result-oriented approach to judging that typically allows a judge to reach right-wing results antithetical to the values held by our society.

Fredrickson's article notes that she has sent letters to Rep. Bachmann and House Speaker John Boehner offering an array of resources and experts to help broaden lawmakers' discussion of the Constitution.