Maybe that should be up to the courts? That is, after all, their function.
The plain language of the Constitution is crystal clear. It was written for the average person to read and understand.
The court's legitimate function is to uphold the Constitution. Instead they have undermined it, and tell us that our rights aren't as clearly written.
Take for example this amendment:
Amendment V: "No person shall...be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."
This is self explanatory to even the most obtuse individual. But instead of honoring its unmistakable meaning, activist courts use 'probable cause' instead of due process.
This isn't a mistake made because of complicated legal theory. It's done for one reason only: The government finds the 5th Amendment cumbersome and inconvenient, and hasn't the willingness or ability to change it through amendment.
In case you hadn't noticed, one of the main purposes of this website is to end the tyranny of activist courts. And here you are, advocating an unmistakable case of activist rule. Maybe you're in the wrong place?
And here you are, assuming that one who is simply explaining the process to closed-minded individuals is advocating a position one way or the other.
"activist courts use 'probable cause' instead of due process."
What does this silly phrase mean? Are you saying that the courts use, "Amendment V: "No person shall...be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process probable cause of law..."
You're not making sense.