Court Upholds Living Document Version of Constitution

What's this? The Constitution applies to our privacy???

A U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled the government must obtain a court warrant to require internet service providers to turn over stored e-mail to authorities. My favorite part of the ruling: The court directly stated, "the Fourth Amendment must keep pace with the inexorable march of technological progress, or its guarantees will wither and perish." Ya think? Of course the Constitution,-- all parts of it-- must keep pace with progress.

This is one of my favorite debates with self-professed conservatives.  Many believe that unless something is directly stated in the Constitution that it is not a power of the federal government but one delegated to the states.  In theory, such a notion of the Constitution is that it's dead, or not a living document that should or can be applied broadly.  Our health care debate is but the most recent example of conservative Republican uproar about the Constitution and its direct expressions.  Just because the Constitution does not directly state the words health care or public option, Republicans believe it treasonous for anyone but them to undertake HCR.

I have never bought into this often debunked theory of the Constitution.  Of course the Constitution is a living document that must change with the times.  Yesterday's court of appeals ruling confirms it.   The words email or computer or technology never appear in the document but that doesn't mean the Constitution doesn't protect our right to privacy when utilizing modern features of society.  Needless to say, this might be one area where Republicans would actually argue the Constitution does protect our privacy when it comes to emails.  Squaring that with how modernity isn't reflected in the Constitution with other issues is highly delusional in their ideology.

For instance, the 2nd Amendment is one area of the Constitution most Republicans want applied broadly and with the most up to date words, expressions and lingo.  Yet the Founders never envisioned today's weaponry and obviously did not intend for people to own anything more than a single shot muzzle.  If you apply the "dead theory" to the 2nd Amendment Republican ideology is but a facade covering items they merely don't agree with, and certainly doesn't give anyone the right to own the firearms we possess today.  Yet it's one they envision was granted to us by God, so it's okay for this part of the Constitution to survive the march of progress.

So next time you hear a Republican praise the modern view that the Constitution protects our private emails, ask them why doesn't it protect our right to affordable health care.