Has the constitution lost it's meaning over the years since it was written in 1787

Thanks Con, for starting the debate. I took the liberty of establishing a resolution since your title and argument offer different topics, one of meaning and the other of influence. Resolved: The United States Constitution has lost the influence it once possessed in its founding years. In recent years, it has become more apparent than ever that the United States Constitution is losing its influence in today's society. To display the diminishing influence of the Constitution, I will analyze the three institutions created in it's development. These three institutions are, of course, the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches. These institutions have taken full advantage of the Constitution by means of an "interpretative approach" of reading its regulations. The first example I wish to bring to light is the "US Patriot Act." The Patriot Act has several sections that allow the Federal Bureau of Investigations to violate the fourth Amendment right of United States citizens. I quote the fourth Amendment here: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." [1] Section 215 [2&3] of the PATRIOT Act grants the FBI the authority to request an order "requiring the production of any tangible things (including books, records, papers, documents, and other items)" relevant to an investigation of international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities. Although the amendment is entitled "Access to Certain Business Records for Foreign Intelligence and International Terrorism Investigations," the scope of the authority is far broader and applies to any records relevant to the individual. This amendment, which overrides state library confidentiality laws, permits the FBI to compel production of business records, medical records, educational records and library records without a showing of "probable cause" (the existence of specific facts to support the belief that a crime has been committed or that the items sought are evidence of a crime). Instead, the government only needs to claim that the records may be related to an ongoing investigation related to terrorism or intelligence activities. Individuals served with a search warrant issued under FISA rules may not disclose, under penalty of law, the existance of the warrant or the facts that records were provided to the government Then, Section 206 [2&4] expands FISA to permit "roving wiretap" authority, which allows the interception of any communications made to or by an intelligence target without specifying the particular telephone line, computer or other facility to be monitored. Prior law required third parties (such as common carriers and others) "specified in court-ordered surveillance" to provide assistance necessary to accomplish the surveillance. The "generic" roving wiretap orders raise significant constitutional issues, as they do not comport with the Fourth Amendment's requirement that any search warrant "particularly describe the place to be searched." That deficiency becomes even more significant where the private communications of law-abiding American citizens might be intercepted incidentally. Clearly these two sections show that the USA Patriot Act was created in spite of the US Constitution and passed by both the Legislative and Executive branches. The next example that I will bring to light is the Butler Act of 1925, Tennessee state law. The Butler act states "It shall be unlawful for any teacher in any of the Universities, Normals and all other public schools of the State which are supported in whole or in part by the public school funds of the State, to teach any theory that denies the story of the Divine Creation of man as taught in the Bible, and to teach instead that man has descended from a lower order of animals." [5] This act is a direct violation of the first US Amendment Right which states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."[6] Later this bill charged John Scopes for teaching the theory of evolution to a high school Biology class. He was taken to court and found guilty in spite of the US Constitution that gives all men the right to free speech and charged $100. He then took the case to the US Supreme court where they too accepted state law over Constitutional law and found him guilty however overturned the case because of a technicality in fine issued by the state court.[7] Although the Butler Bill was later appealed, this shows a direct loss of influence from the US Constitution where both state legislature and National Judicial Supreme Court declared that the state laws was more supreme than his Constitutional right as a US Citizen. The last example I believe I will have room for in this phase of my argument will be on the Death Penalty. The death penalty is a direct violation of the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution, which states "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."[8] The death penalty is severe in the damage it causes to the human body. Inflicting mortal damage on the human body, whether by electric chair or lethal injection, is equivalent to or even worse than torture, and violates basic human rights that are inherent and irrevocable. The death penalty is also cruel and torturous in the way that it inflicts psychological damage on convicts that wait on death row. Not only are guilty men inflicted upon by the death penalty but also the innocent who were put through trials unjustly. There is reason to believe that a number of innocent lives have been taken throughout the history of the death sentence. Marquis de Lafayette describes the situation most aptly "I shall ask for the abolition of the death penalty until I have the infallibility of human judgment demonstrated to me." [9] This displays a lack of influence of the Constitution in all Branches, Judicial, Executive, and Legislative for allowing this punishment. Combined with the other examples outlined above, I have effectively displayed a diminishing influence of the U.S. Constitution in the roles of our Governing bodies. If these bodies are capable of viewing the Constitution in ways that most benefit their privatized or partisan goals, then what higher influence is being enforced when state laws assume the authority to ignore constitutional authority? When established institutions rule in favor of state laws over Constitutional rights? The answer is simple, the Constitution is being used when it is needed and loosely interpreted when it conflicts with the interest of governing institutions. Sources. [1] US Constitution - http://www.usconstitution.net... [2] H.R. 3162 aka. USA Patriot Act - http://www.govtrack.us... [3] US Code Title 50, Chapter 36, sub chapter 4 in reference to Section 215 of the Patriot act - http://www.law.cornell.edu... [4] US Code Title 50, Chapter 36, sub chapter 1 - http://www.law.cornell.edu... [5] Butler Act - http://www.law.umkc.edu... [6]US Constitution - http://www.usconstitution.net... [7] Scopes Trial - http://www.law.umkc.edu... [8] US Constitution - http://www.usconstitution.net... [9] Death Trial innocents - http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...