Originalism vs. Living Constitutionalism: How should judges interpret the constitution?

Should we stick to the Constitution’s original meaning—or adapt it to modern society? 📜 Originalism: The Constitution should be interpreted based on its original meaning when written. 🔄 Living Constitutionalism: The Constitution is a flexible document that should adapt to societal changes, ensuring the law remains relevant today. The second debate in Vanderbilt Law’s "Respectfully Dissent" series brings ‪@UCBerkeleySchoolofLaw‬'s Dean Erwin Chemerinsky and Vanderbilt Law Professor Brian Fitzpatrick together as they debate these two competing philosophies that shape major Supreme Court decisions in the United States. This debate is more than just theory—it influences real-world rulings on abortion, gun rights, free speech, and more. With the Supreme Court at the center of political battles, understanding these interpretations is more important than ever. 👉 Who do you think had the stronger argument? Drop your thoughts in the comments! 💬 -- Follow us on socials: Keep up with all things #VandyLaw on social media, including student-driven content, faculty media insights, campus events, and more. X (F.K.A. Twitter): @VanderbiltLaw https://x.com/vanderbiltlaw LinkedIn: @VandyLaw / vandylaw Facebook: @VanderbiltLaw / vanderbiltlaw Instagram: @Vanderbilt_Law / vanderbilt_law