“Some men look at Constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, & deem them, like the ark of the covenant, too sacred to be touched. they ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment. I knew that age well: I belonged to it, and labored with it. it deserved well of it’s country. it was very like the present, but without the experience of the present: and 40 years of experience in government is worth a century of book-reading: and this they would say themselves, were they to rise from the dead. I am certainly not an advocate for frequent & untried changes in laws and constitutions ... but I know also that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind ... we might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.”
Thomas Jefferson on Constitutions
- Thread starter r14veer
- Start date
What’s your point???
The means to change our constitution are spelled out in the document and has been used many times over the years.
Last edited:
This is in direct opposition to all the “originalist” constitutional scholars.
Jefferson is pointing out what many of the founders believed - the Constitution was any evolving document.
I'm far from being a constitutional scholar but I believe most/all "originalist" constitutional scholars would say that they believe in and support the existing methods to modify the Constitution.
This is and interesting and short read: https://www.thoughtco.com/how-to-amend-the-constitution-3368310
This is and interesting and short read: https://www.thoughtco.com/how-to-amend-the-constitution-3368310
My real point is that the current state of hyper-partisan atmosphere in our government (that the founders hoped would not be the case) doesn't allow for it to change to follow the "progress of the human mind," as Jefferson put it.
The extremely high bar of the Amendment process, is the biggest barrier to changes in our Constitution, more so than partisanship in my opinion.
I'm not sure what Jefferson considered "progress of the human mind" but I say one man's "progress" could be another's extremism, and the process is designed to counteract anything that is not sensible and desirable to a large majority.
Changing our constitution should not be easy. It however is not impossible and if a change is popular enough it will pass.
ERA didn’t quite make it through the process
27th Amendment only took 202 years!!!
If you are in favor of changing our constitution better get started now!!
Jefferson wanted the constitution to be re-written every 20 years, so that each new generation could govern itself by the laws that they saw fit to pass. That's one of those things that sounds really good in one's head, but probably would have eventually led us back into something closer to monarchy/dictatorship after a few generations and a couple wars.
Similar threads
