If anything goes, then it is true that any lawyer worth his salt can create enough work to keep at least one other lawyer busy. And we can characterize much of this as advocating for social change. Of course, if a lawyer can be unprincipled when advocating for social change, he can be unprincipled when advocating for one's client. More cleverness produces more welching or blame shifting which leads to more litigation necessitating more lawyers. Certainty is not part of the modern legal lexicon.
Lawyers become judges.
But, of course, if the Supreme Court itself is without principles and legislatures abdicate their legislative responsibilities, lower courts get a green light. It no longer follows the law but swallows the law. No less an icon than former Justice William Brennen answered that question. We look to the history of the time of framing and to the intervening history of interpretation. For the genius of the Constitution rests not in any static meaning it might have had in a world that is dead and gone, but in the adaptability of its great principles to cope with current problems and current needs.