Originalism and its impact on young women in Indiana- W4C Voices

W4C Voices

Originalism and its impact on young women in Indiana

Olivia Mulhern, Intern, Women4Change Indiana

Originalism is the idea that the meaning of the constitution is fixed in time. It grew in popularity following the Civil Rights movement, in an attempt to stall the evolving issues and rights impacting citizens of today. Originalists find themselves rooted in the past, using past circumstances to address current day issues. We have seen originalism’s impacts in court cases, like the Dobbs decision and the United States vs Rahimi.

In the case of Dobbs, originalists argued that at the time of the creation of the Constitution, there were campaigns against abortion, indicating that the founders would have been against abortion. Dobbs resulted in allocating power to the states to determine abortion rights for its respective residents.

Additionally, we see this in the case of United States vs Rahimi. Rahimi as a law, prevents people convicted of domestic violence from possessing firearms. In the case of United States vs Rahimi, the originalists who sought to overturn Rahimi, argued that at the time of the creation of the Constitution, there were no laws protecting domestic violence victims. Therefore, Rahimi originalists believed it was unconstitutional because it infringed on the second amendment.  

Maintaining an originalist perspective to protect the status quo can be detrimental to the rights of all citizens. As a young woman living in Indiana, I think it's important for us to have laws and protections that enable freedom, equality, and participation in society.

Using narrow interpretations of the past to justify policies that are supposed to help us in the future ignores the fact that women did not have many rights at the time of the writing of the Constitution. Though we have come a long way to remedy this, if Dobbs showed us anything, it is that when human, civil, and constitutional rights are left to the states to interpret and pick and choose, women living in states like Indiana have limited human rights.

We should not use history as a template, but rather as an inspiration to learn from our past mistakes in order to create a society for all. In regards to the Dobbs decision, many women like myself find themselves wondering whether Indiana is a place where women feel empowered to work, raise a family, and access to safe healthcare. We want Indiana to be a place that invites diversity of people to create a society that is well-equipped for the challenges of tomorrow.

The Dobbs decision is a reminder that we need to focus on the principles written into the Constitution as a structure to look at the current challenges and realities of the present day.