A New Meaning of Constitution Day

Written by Kylie Pardalis

Sept. 17, 1787 marks the day that the U.S. Constitution was signed. This day represents the unity of a country under a new government built to represent the people and freedom. Now, in 2025, a change seems to be occurring where the Constitution has lost its power to represent the people, unity, and freedom for all.

The Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy had their opening event of this year on Sept. 4, where the idea of “What the Constitution Means to Us” was discussed through a variety of speakers. The fourth edition of the event consisted of speeches from Clough Fellows, a Boston College professor of political science, a former prime minister of Tunisia, and keynote speaker Shannon Bream of Fox News.

Starting off the event, Jonathan Lawrence, the director of the Clough Center and professor of political science at Boston College, began by stating, “in what is a tense political environment where half the country disagrees vehemently with the other half, we are here today to celebrate the Constitution.” He continued by saying a few statements that many of us can agree on like, “it is sobering to consider the future of our government” and that “when well-intentioned people differ so fundamentally on deeply important issues, it is even more critical to keep to an agreed upon set of rules and guardrails.” The guardrails of our nation seem to be hanging on by a thread as leaders that don’t seem to be well-intentioned continually ignore the Constitution.

The event continued with an excerpt from Heidi Schreck’s play, “What the Constitution Means to Me” read by BC student, Haley Raffaele, MCAS ‘26. In this excerpt an emphasis is placed on the Ninth Amendment of the Constitution, which states that just because the Constitution does not list a certain right it does not mean that you do not have it. This specific portion of the Constitution seems to have been lost in recent times. Now it is becoming abundantly clear that rights listed in the Constitution are not completely sacred according to the current administration. This is demonstrated through Raffaele’s discussion of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution relating to citizenship. She emphasizes how when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified there was still no mention of women or Native Americans, or how immigrants could become citizens. This last point is currently at the forefront of the nation’s mind because of the fact that, as Raffaele says, “it is up to the whims of lawmakers to decide who is a good immigrant or a bad immigrant.” This appears to be unjust and unlawful, but the Supreme Court has upheld the idea that it is legal for ICE agents to use factors such as race, ethnicity, or spoken language as justification for stops. This newfound interpretation of the Constitution enables questions to arise about the morality of the entire document and the direction the nation is heading towards.

The next speaker, Nina Hemsey, MCAS ‘27, discusses how her first understanding of the Constitution was through a poster in her fifth grade classroom that displayed the statement, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union.” She specifically emphasizes the “more perfect” portion of the sentence, questioning whether perfection is ever attainable. Hemsey finds that these words truly mean a promise to work toward perfection, making the Constitution a living document. Her interpretation demonstrates that the Constitution can be changed for the better ,such as when it expanded voting rights to women with the Nineteenth Amendment or with the Thirteenth Amendment’s abolishment of slavery. But the fact that the Constitution is a living document has also been used for harm rather than good throughout the long history of the U.S.. In the early days of its formation, Native Americans were continuously harmed by the words written by the framers through the Indian Commerce Clause, assimilation policies, and denial of citizenship and rights. Often throughout its history, the Constitution has harmed poor Americans through legalizing indentured servitude in the early republic and not allowing poor citizens to vote. Most of these harmful policies have been rectified during the growth of the nation, but they demonstrate the fact that the Constitution allows for the justification of incredible harm to be done to certain groups if given the opportunity.

Political science professor Marc Landy professed his deep love for the Constitution, stating that “you never love something as much as when it’s under attack.” First he speaks about how it has been “attacked from the left because of its demonstrably nondemocratic features.” Many portions of the Constitution aren’t fully democratic but according to him, that is the point because “it is meant to create hurdles and not barriers to the popular will.” He then goes on to explain how “now it is threatened by a president who wants to substitute his will for the will of the Constitution.” Presently many of the hurdles are being turned into barriers which is an attack on the popular will and democracy as a whole. Professor Landy ends by stating his opinion that “Trump is wrong because he understands neither the spirit nor the letter of the Constitution,” and because of this, he interprets it however he chooses which is the exact opposite of what the framers intended.

The final speaker was, Fox News’ Shannon Bream, the chief legal correspondent and the host of “Fox News Sunday.” Before joining the network, she practiced law with a specialization in sexual harassment and racial discrimination. Bream begins by stating that we are “not the first to feel this kind of anxiety about the survival of the constitutional underpinnings that shape our legal framework and ensure the continued existence of our great democratic experiment.” She touches on an abundance of historical events that demonstrate how the amendments should reaffirm how the framework is working because the Constitution is an imperfect document. Bream brings up a lot of history, but not much is said about current events surrounding that Constitution. Eventually she brings up how the Supreme Court is going to be faced “with a flood of emergency action related to challenges of President Trump’s executive actions” stating that “this is not the first time that American citizens have looked to the courts and to Congress to serve as a check to the executive.” She speaks on how it is amazing that a check to the executive even exists but what is not mentioned is how currently those checks are only being used sparingly. Lower courts have been working on checking the executive, but many recent Supreme Court decisions seem to be in support of presidential actions even if those decisions differ from precedent. This appears to be a serious danger to our Constitution because, as Bream continuously mentions, one of the most important parts of the Constitution is the fact that it has checks and balances.

Without those checks being utilized the future of the Constitution seems to be unclear. The Constitution was formed through “laying out freedoms for some, but wrongfully not for all, and it would also need a structure that would enable us to improve upon it.” As Bream puts it, the Constitution was built with a framework for improvement. Now with the current government shut down and the Supreme Court back in session. Decisions made and agreements that are formed will be crucial to the upholding of our nation’s founding documents and the future of the U.S. as a whole.

Where to watch the event: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UknAykwCGzc