Compare And Contrast Edwin Meese And William Brennan

774 Words4 Pages

We value the Constitution because it is the document which has governed our country for over 200 years. In it we find principles, ideals and laws that have guided our society and our government. Specifically, the duty of the judicial branch includes interpreting laws based on what the Constitution says. Today, there is debate about the way in which the Court should interpret the Constitution. Edwin Meese and William Brennan are two leaders with differing views concerning the role of the Constitution in government today. Both of them spoke about the intent of the framers of the Constitution and the way in which we should use their original theories.
During his Speech to the Federalist Lawyer Society, Meese, a former Attorney General of the United States, argued for “originalism” which means that judges should seek and apply the founder’s constitutional understanding as they decide cases. …show more content…

However, after careful consideration I decided that I prefer Meese’s method of applying constitutional principles. I made this decision because I believe that the methods of interpretation Brennan described will lead America to change the foundation on which it was based. America was based on principles of freedom, limited government, checks and balances and so on. Brennan believes that egalitarianism will lead to true equality and equal opportunity. I believe that the principle of egalitarianism has and will continue to take away the rights of individuals. For example, in today’s society if I believe that homosexuality is wrong and do not openly support it I am deemed as one who believes that homosexuals do not have rights. I believe that the framers of the Constitution clearly outlined principles that oppose the effects of egalitarianism. I also believe that the justice system should not be making decisions concerning the personal lives of individuals unless those individuals infringe upon the rights of

Open Document