Skip to content
Project 2025
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories
Defense Secretary Hegseth Testifies Before Senate Appropriations Committee

Can We Fire Hegseth Yet?

People walking down the steps of the U.S. capitol.

DNC's Proposed RCV Ban Sparks Debate Over 2028 Presidential Primaries

What Will It Take to Rebuild American Democracy?

What Will It Take to Rebuild American Democracy?

Missouri Drew a Gerrymander. Now Its Secretary of State Says Voters Can’t Say No.

Missouri Drew a Gerrymander. Now Its Secretary of State Says Voters Can’t Say No.

State Gerrymandering Surge Ends Path to Proportional Representation

State Gerrymandering Surge Ends Path to Proportional Representation

Defer to the Preamble

Defer to the Preamble
Getty Images
Leland R. Beaumont
By Leland R. BeaumontJul 12, 2023
Leland R. Beaumont
Leland R. Beaumont is a contributor for The Fulcrum, a nonpartisan publication dedicated to strengthening democracy by fostering informed civic engagement and elevating diverse perspectives.
See More Writings by author

Leland R. Beaumont is an independent wisdom researcher who is seeking real good. He is currently developing the Applied Wisdom curriculum on Wikiversity.

The many split decisions by the U.S. Supreme court justices demonstrate the ambiguity inherent in the U.S. Constitution. Fortunately, the Founding Fathers made their intentions clear in the P reamble to the Constitution where they say:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

This Preamble makes it clear the Founding Fathers intended the Constitution to “…promote the general Welfare …” of the people.

Compare the clarity of the Preamble to the dangerously ambiguous language of the Second Amendment. Ratified on December 15, 1791, it states:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed

If one adopts an originalist view of the Constitution, which asserts that all statements in the Constitution must be interpreted based on the original understanding, then the Second Amendment means that if you are a member of a state militia and that militia is well regulated, you are free to carry your musket.

However, almost 250 years later in the era of high powered assault weapons interpretations of the Second Amendment now allow the purchase and open carry of assault type weapons, such as the AR-15-style rifle. This weapon has been prominent in mass shootings in the United States.

Fortunately, the clarity of the Preamble can help us resolve the ambiguity of the Second Amendment.

Knowing the Founding Fathers intended the Constitution to “…promote the general Welfare …” of the people we should ask ourselves if allowing purchase and use of AR-15-style rifles promotes the general welfare of the people.

This question can be answered empirically, for example by comparing the welfare of those killed and injured by AR-15 style rifles to the various benefits enjoyed by their owners. This information should be used by justices to form their opinions as they interpret the wishes of the Founding Fathers.

Promoting general welfare means that the government should see to it that the citizens of our country enjoy good fortune, health, and happiness to the benefit of as many people as possible, not just a few. By paying close attention to the preamble of the Constitution today’s Supreme Court will do a better job of fulfilling the wishes of our Founding Fathers.


Latest news

A military ship out in the sea.
Ethics & Leadership

Reasons to Care about the Sailors Aboard the USS Lincoln

How Lawyers Protect America’s Democracy and Rule of Law
Rule of Law

How Lawyers Protect America’s Democracy and Rule of Law

Two children playing baseball during the Little League World Series Consolation Game at Howard J. Lamade Stadium on August 25, 2024 in South Williamsport, Pennsylvania.
Bridging & Common Ground

For Two Weeks in August, Sports Still Belong to the Kids

Read More

An illustration of the U.S. flag on the shape of the U.S. with blue and red figures of people across it.

Every state has its own constitution.

aprott iStock / Getty Images Plus

How State Constitutions Became the Battleground for American Rights and Liberties – on Both the Left and Right

Beyond picking governors, state legislators, local officials and representatives to serve in Congress, voters in almost every state this year will have the opportunity to amend the language of their state constitution. In one state, they could potentially rewrite the constitution altogether.

Though the U.S. Constitution is rarely amended, voters frequently amend their state constitutions. In every election cycle, voters are asked to ratify constitutional amendments.

Keep ReadingShow less
Protestors holding signs at a rally, one reads, "Trump is not above the law."

Protesters gather at a Nobody Is Above the Law rally protesting President Trump's interference in the Mueller investigation on November 08, 2018 in Washington, DC.

Larry French/Getty Images

The Double Standard Presidency: When We Watch Leaders Act Above the Law

Americans are told that no one is above the law. Yet every day, they watch a president behave in ways that would get any ordinary citizen fired, disciplined, confronted, or held accountable — and they watch some Americans excuse it. What makes this moment even more striking is that critics across the political spectrum, including conservatives, now warn that the presidency is operating on a dangerous double standard. This is not a partisan concern. It is a constitutional one. And it is tearing at the fabric of our democracy.

For generations, the Constitution has provided guardrails — separation of powers, checks and balances, oversight mechanisms, and limits on executive authority — designed to prevent any leader from functioning above the law. The framers feared concentrated power more than anything else. They believed that the presidency must be constrained not only by written law but by norms of restraint, dignity, and respect for institutions. Those norms held for centuries because presidents understood that the office was larger than any individual, and Congress understood that oversight was not optional.

Keep ReadingShow less
Study Reveals Sharp Generational Divide in How Latino Identity Influences Daily Life

Study Reveals Sharp Generational Divide in How Latino Identity Influences Daily Life

Latino immigrants and U.S.-born Latinos differ sharply in how much their identity shapes their daily lives, according to recent findings from the Pew Research Center’s 2025 National Survey of Latinos. The survey shows that Latino immigrants are far more likely than U.S.-born Latinos to say their identity is central to who they are, and that it influences their experiences in the United States. Pew researchers Gabriel Piña, Mark Hugo Lopez, Sahana Mukherjee, Dalia Fahmy, and Alexandra Cahn report that the divide reflects differences in cultural connection, lived experience, and generational distance from immigrant roots.

Pew’s analysis finds that Latino immigrants are significantly more likely to say their origins are central to their identity, while U.S.-born Latinos — especially those in the third generation or higher — are less likely to feel that connection. The report notes that “U.S. Hispanics are divided on whether their identity helps or hurts them in America,” with some respondents describing their Latino identity as a source of pride and connection, and others saying it is tied to discrimination or barriers.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Democracy Cannot Run on an AI Model

Clerk Matthew Sandbar, 34, demonstrates part of the ballot-sorting process to members of the media attending a walkthrough of the Philadelphia Ballot Processing Center used to process the ballots of the 2022 US midterm elections, in Philadelphia on October 27, 2022.

Photo by Ryan Collerd / AFP via Getty Images

A Democracy Cannot Run on an AI Model

Tallying the results of Washington, DC’s first ranked-choice election in June took about 10 days—longer than many voters are used to. In an age when artificial intelligence can generate an answer in seconds, waiting days for election results can feel old-fashioned, inefficient, even suspicious. And it is about to matter far more widely. This November, 17 states, cities, and counties will use ranked-choice voting, including Maine and Alaska statewide, in races that could help decide control of Congress. More voters than ever will watch results take days to resolve, and more will be asked to trust a count they cannot see.

But that slowness may be one of its most democratic features.

Keep ReadingShow less
© Copyright 2026