The Constitution should be interpreted through a balance of both principles considering the original intent thereof and by considering it as a living document at the same time. This law is considered as the fundamental law of the land wherein all other laws and judicial decisions must conform to otherwise these other laws would be void for being contrary thereto. When there are vague provisions in the Constitution, the spirit of the law should be determined by looking into the original intent of the framers thereof. But, other factors should also be considered such as the present circumstances calling for the need to interpret the Constitution. This means that when a provision in the Constitution is already rendered inapplicable by reason of some changes which calls for a different interpretation thereof, then this should be followed instead of strictly applying the provision of the Constitution according to the original intent thereof.
The justice that the Constitution seeks to uphold would be rendered meaningless if there would be undue insistence to abide by the original intent thereof when such is no longer practical and feasible. The Constitution should be built in a way that it is able to abide by the present needs of a government otherwise, there would be injustice. It cannot also be strictly interpreted by treating the Constitution as a living document for there would be a disregard of the intention by which these provisions were written. No person can predict how a law would be applied in the years ahead of him. Thus, there should always be an allowance for some changes in the law for it to be applied in the present times by upholding the intention of those who painstakingly wrote it for the people. There interpretation should not amount to a total deviation from the original intention of the Constitution but should instead be read in consonance therewith.
– Mount, S. 2006. Constitutional Topic: Constitutional Interpretation. Retrieved April 30, 2009 from http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_intr.html.