Throughout his political career, Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) has touted his dedication to "preserving and defending" the Constitution. In a prominent position on Cruz’s website and written in glaring letters is the statement, “Ted Cruz has spent a lifetime fighting to defend the Constitution.” He repeatedly alludes to Thomas Jefferson by saying, “Our nation’s founding document and the supreme law of the land was crafted by our founding fathers to act as chains to bind the mischief of government and to protect the liberties endowed to us by our Creator.” But was this the founders' purpose in creating the Constitution? Or was the Constitution created as an interpretative document, one crafted not to bind progress, but to facilitate progress and discussion? Is Cruz's use of Jefferson a crafty misrepresentation?
On June 21, 1788 the Constitution was ratified. Shortly after, in 1791, Congress proposed the addition of twelve amendments to the Constitution, ten of which--the Bill of Rights--were simultaneously incorporated into the Constitution. Following the addition of the Bill of Rights to the Constitution, seventeen subsequent amendments have been adopted and ratified by Congress. As Jefferson, a self-proclaimed strict constitutionalist, stated in his address to Alexander Hamilton regarding the National Bank and the Constitution, "The second general phrase [of the Constitution] is, 'to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution the enumerated powers'". The reason for the addition of these amendments lies in the words of the Constitution itself; necessity propels addition and revision to the Constitution. As society progresses, the words of the Constitution become increasingly hard to apply to current affairs.
Ted Cruz has repeatedly dismissed the notion that the Constitution is and was intended to be a "living and breathing" document. His statement that the Constitution was intended to be left untouched is demonstrably false. Subsequent to the ratification of the Bill of Rights, two amendments, one addressing state sovereign immunity and another revising the presidential election process, were added to the Constitution within a thirteen-year period. These amendments needed to be incorporated into the Constitution to account for changes in government, society, and foreign affairs.
Thomas Jefferson, in an attempt to constitutionally validate his proposal for the Louisiana Purchase, addressed his Democratic-Republican counterpart, Wilson Cary Nicholas, by writing, "Let us go on then perfecting it, by adding by way of amendment to the Constitution, those powers which time and trial show are still wanting." Jefferson's statement emphasizes the importance of addition to the Constitution based on both necessity and maturation of interpretation. Jefferson argues for adherence to the words of the Constitution, at the same time as he proposes that it be revised and expanded as needed.
So does Senator Cruz protect and fight for the Constitution?
For his entire political career, Cruz has touted his defense of the Second Amendment, which protects the right to bear arms. However, Cruz's "defense" of the Second Amendment has been based solely on his opposition to the Assault Weapons Ban proposed in March of 2013. The Constitution was ratified in 1788, assault weapons were first implemented in 1940. There is no possible way for the framers of the Constitution to have predicted the future use of assault weapons. By the standard of Jefferson's "time and trial," Ted Cruz's "constitutional" opposition to the Assault Weapons Ban is profoundly unconstitutional and contradicts the founding principle of the Constitution: revision when necessary.
ZWG
On June 21, 1788 the Constitution was ratified. Shortly after, in 1791, Congress proposed the addition of twelve amendments to the Constitution, ten of which--the Bill of Rights--were simultaneously incorporated into the Constitution. Following the addition of the Bill of Rights to the Constitution, seventeen subsequent amendments have been adopted and ratified by Congress. As Jefferson, a self-proclaimed strict constitutionalist, stated in his address to Alexander Hamilton regarding the National Bank and the Constitution, "The second general phrase [of the Constitution] is, 'to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution the enumerated powers'". The reason for the addition of these amendments lies in the words of the Constitution itself; necessity propels addition and revision to the Constitution. As society progresses, the words of the Constitution become increasingly hard to apply to current affairs.
Ted Cruz has repeatedly dismissed the notion that the Constitution is and was intended to be a "living and breathing" document. His statement that the Constitution was intended to be left untouched is demonstrably false. Subsequent to the ratification of the Bill of Rights, two amendments, one addressing state sovereign immunity and another revising the presidential election process, were added to the Constitution within a thirteen-year period. These amendments needed to be incorporated into the Constitution to account for changes in government, society, and foreign affairs.
Thomas Jefferson, in an attempt to constitutionally validate his proposal for the Louisiana Purchase, addressed his Democratic-Republican counterpart, Wilson Cary Nicholas, by writing, "Let us go on then perfecting it, by adding by way of amendment to the Constitution, those powers which time and trial show are still wanting." Jefferson's statement emphasizes the importance of addition to the Constitution based on both necessity and maturation of interpretation. Jefferson argues for adherence to the words of the Constitution, at the same time as he proposes that it be revised and expanded as needed.
So does Senator Cruz protect and fight for the Constitution?
For his entire political career, Cruz has touted his defense of the Second Amendment, which protects the right to bear arms. However, Cruz's "defense" of the Second Amendment has been based solely on his opposition to the Assault Weapons Ban proposed in March of 2013. The Constitution was ratified in 1788, assault weapons were first implemented in 1940. There is no possible way for the framers of the Constitution to have predicted the future use of assault weapons. By the standard of Jefferson's "time and trial," Ted Cruz's "constitutional" opposition to the Assault Weapons Ban is profoundly unconstitutional and contradicts the founding principle of the Constitution: revision when necessary.
ZWG
Interest over Time on the American Constitution through Google Searches | Regional Interest on the American Constitution |
 |  |
Source:Google Trends
Recurrence of the American Constitution in Literature
