Strict Versus Loose Construction
499
Nationalists and the States’ Rightists dominated American politics during the first century of the Republic. The Civil War (or War Between the
States, as the southerners preferred to call it) was the end result of this
constitutional quarrel. To a very large extent, the great military conflict
that erupted between the North and the South in 1861 was fought over
this basic question: what is the correct interpretation of the Constitution
respecting the powers of the States and the national government? The
Civil War answered this question in part by laying to rest the doctrines
of Nullification and Secession. But it did not put an end to federalism or
change the rules of constitutional interpretation. The basic principle that
the Constitution should be strictly construed to reflect the original meaning of the words and text has found considerable support on the Supreme
Court since the Civil War, just as the principle that it should be loosely construed has also enjoyed considerable—if not majority—support.
In the final analysis, it must be remembered that the question of interpretation is inevitably affected by politics. Ideally, the Constitution
should be given a consistent interpretation. But as the Founding Fathers
understood well, the temptations of office are often too great to expect
a uniform adherence to principle in all situations. Those who possess
political power may be inclined to favor a broad interpretation of the
Constitution in order to carry out their programs, whereas those who
are out of power may be inclined to argue for a narrow interpretation
in order to block those programs.
The task of the principled statesman and j Ց