[hosepipe]

[ Anyhoot. The fans of a "living constitution" do not see it this way, I gather.... ]

In deed...
"If the Constitution is to be construed to mean what the majority at any given period in history wish the Constitution to mean, why a written Constitution?"--Frank J. Hogan, President, American Bar Assn. (1939)

[betty boop]

...why a written Constitution?

So it can't be willy-nilly defeated by passing fashion, half-baked ideologies, and self-interested opinion is why. IMHO FWIW.

It seems the advocates of the immediately foregoing will attack the very language of the Constitution to make it say what it doesn't say, because otherwise such folk wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

[curiosity]

"If the Constitution is to be construed to mean what the majority at any given period in history wish the Constitution to mean, why a written Constitution?"--Frank J. Hogan, President, American Bar Assn. (1939)

Actually, given how the courts have twisted the meaning of the Constitution so much, I'm beginning to think that having an unwritten constitution is a better strategy.

It seems to work pretty well for the Brits. What sayest thou, friends from accross the pond?