Which method of interpreting the constitution, "original intent" or "living document," do you think is more valid? use what you know about these methods to defend your opinion. read more > >

To me, as a third-year law student, the correct approach is "living document."

The number one reason for this is that the Constitution was written in the late 1700s. The framers could not have envisioned, let alone written, a document that considered a world with the internet, access to space, etc.

So, our choices are either to have a new Constitutional convention OR adapt the current document.

I choose the latter.

where is the