|
Interpreting
the Constitution
When
the courts must decide a case, the meaning of the laws in
question is not always clear. The Fourteenth Amendment,
which guarantees equal protection of the laws, has been
particularly difficult to interpret over the years because
of the ambiguous nature of the concept of equality. Does
treating people equally mean treating them exactly the same?
Or are there circumstances when equal treatment sometimes
requires different treatment? The courts have come to different
conclusions at different points in history and in different
cases.
For
more on interpreting the concept of equality, click
here.
Judges
use their reasoning skills to decide what particular laws
mean when they rule on cases. Different judges sometimes
use different reasoning skills to interpret the Constitution,
meaning that judges do not always agree on the meaning of
the Constitution. There are six widely accepted methods
of interpretation that shed some light on the meaning of
the Constitution.
|
Historical
Interpretation
|
A
judge looks to the intentions of the framers and ratifiers
of the Constitution to shed light on its meaning. |
|
Textual
Interpretation
|
A
judge looks to the meaning of the words in the Constitution,
relying on common understandings of what the words mean
today. |
|
Structural
Interpretation
|
A
judge infers structural rules (power relationships between
institutions, for instance) from the relationships specifically
outlined in the Constitution. |
|
Doctrinal
Interpretation
|
A
judge applies rules established by precedents. |
|
Ethical
Interpretation
|
A
judge looks to the moral commitments reflected in the
Constitution. |
|
Prudential
Interpretation
|
A
judge seeks to balance the costs and benefits of a particular
ruling. |
Keeping
these interpretation tools in mind, read the following excerpts
from the majority and dissenting opinions in Plessy
v. Ferguson. The majority and dissenting opinions each
had different interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Consider the original wording of the Fourteenth Amendment
and determine which method of reasoning (historical, textual,
etc.) was used to reach an opinion. Discuss your findings
with the class and then proceed by answering the questions
following the excerpts.
Fourteenth Amendment
Section
1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States
and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens
of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge
the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United
States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life,
liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor
deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.
|
Majority Opinion
The
object of the [Fourteenth] amendment was undoubtedly
to enforce the absolute equality of the two races before
the law, but in the nature of things it could not have
been intended to abolish distinctions based upon color,
or to enforce social, as distinguished from political,
equality, or a commingling of the two races upon terms
unsatisfactory to either. Laws permitting, and even
requiring, their separation in places where they are
liable to be brought into contact do not necessarily
imply the inferiority of either race to the other, and
have been generally, if not universally, recognized
as within the competency of the state legislatures in
the exercise of their police power....
|
Dissenting Opinion
They
[Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments]
removed the race line from our governmental systems.
They had . . . a common purpose, namely, to secure 'to a
race recently emancipated, a race that through many
generations have been held in slavery, all the civil
rights that the superior race enjoy.'
They
declared, in legal effect, this court has further
said, 'that the law in the states shall be the same
for the black as for the white; that all persons,
whether colored or white, shall stand equal before
the laws of the states; and in regard to the colored
race, for whose protection the amendment was primarily
designed, that no discrimination shall be made against
them by law because of their color.'
' . . . The
words of the amendment, it is true, are prohibitory,
but they contain a necessary implication of a positive
immunity or right, most valuable to the colored race,
the right to exemption from unfriendly legislation
against them distinctively as colored; exemption from
legal discriminations, implying inferiority in civil
society, lessening the security of their enjoyment
of the rights which others enjoy; and discriminations
which are steps towards reducing them to the condition
of a subject race.'
|
Questions
to Consider:
- Decide what methods of interpretation are being used
in each of the opinions.
- What language in each opinion supports your finding
of the methods of interpretation being used?
- Using the Fourteenth Amendment and the facts in the
Plessy v. Ferguson case, give your interpretation of the
Fourteenth Amendment as it applies to Plessy. What method
of interpretation did you use? Why?
- What are the inherent drawbacks to each type of interpretive
method?
- What are the inherent benefits of each type of interpretive
method?
- Do you believe the courts should follow only one type
of interpretive method? Why or why not?
|
