The Blog

The Timely Constitution

Adults may not know whether the Constitution matters, but thankfully some students do.

12:00 PM, Jul 4, 2011 • By TONY WOODLIEF
Widget tooltip
Single Page Print Larger Text Smaller Text Alerts

Time magazine is nothing if not direct. Featuring a picture of the Constitution, the bottom half of which has been run through a shredder, today’s cover asks: “Does it Still Matter?

We the people, form the Constitution

Inside the magazine, Time Managing Editor Richard Stengel spends nearly 5,000 words  explaining that it kind of does, except when it doesn’t, though who is to say when, exactly, because it doesn’t tell us anything specific about terrorists and health care and collateralized debt.

It’s a dull method of eliding the question, to argue that a principle doesn’t give specific direction, since that is the whole point of a principle in the first place. To argue, as Stengel does, that we can’t know what James Madison would have thought about Obamacare because people in his day used leeches, is sophomoric.

But wait, I’m being unfair to sophomores. For the past five years, we at the Bill of Rights Institute, an education non-profit devoted to teaching students about the words and ideas of America’s Founders, have conducted a nationwide essay contest to ask high-school students what it means to be an American. Over 80,000 students, representing every state in the union, have written essays describing the principles that make America unique. After reading Mr. Stengel’s assertions, we decided to turn to some of our student essays to see what they might say in reply.

In response to Stengel’s claim, for example, that the Constitution “sure doesn’t say” that it was intended to limit the federal government, Kansas student Timothy Cahill, Jr. rightly observes that this is precisely what the founders intended:

Madison wrote that whenever the federal government oversteps its delegated authority, the American people can "by the election of more faithful representatives, annul the acts of the usurpers."

Where Stengel writes that “a constitution in and of itself guarantees nothing,” New Jersey student Sashwat Chugh says:

I’ve studied the Constitution of other countries, including Pakistan and India, and their systems of government don’t have the same protections as ours. The executive can take over in these other countries at any time, but our Constitution includes protections so there is no way for that to happen.

To Stengel’s argument that “we cannot let the Constitution become an obstacle to the U.S.'s moving into the future with a sensible health care system, a globalized economy, an evolving sense of civil and political rights,” we find a rebuttal in the essay of Pennsylvania student Ryan Shymansky, who understands the solutions to America’s ills lie not with a federal government that needs unshackling from the Constitution, but with individual citizens whose entrepreneurialism is protected by that self-same Constitution:

The difference between America and the rest of the world is this: here, the people delegate powers to the government, while in other nations, the government delegates rights to the people. The vast majority of rights and responsibilities in America lie with the individual, and this is spelled out in the Constitution.

Likewise does California student Michael Tharratt dispense with the notion that its the Constitution holding us back from a good and prosperous future:

Dependency is a rot hidden at the core of any civilization. It eats away at all aspects of culture and society, leaving barren waste behind... The cure for dependency, however, is at the heart of American ideals: self-reliance; the ability to prosper and forward oneself though faith in oneself, and through one's own actions. Self-reliance is a keystone for American Independence...

Stengel does admirably end his Time essay with a stirring notion, which is that “the Constitution does not protect our spirit of liberty; our spirit of liberty protects the Constitution.” There is certainly truth in the second clause, though if the Founders thought all that was needed was a spirit of liberty, they wouldn’t have bothered with a Constitution or Declaration of Independence in the first place. This is why James Madison famously wrote about the necessity of a constrained government in Federalist Paper #51:

Recent Blog Posts

The Weekly Standard Archives

Browse 19 Years of the Weekly Standard

Old covers