should our interpretation of the United States Constitution evolve over time?

Answer: The question of whether our interpretation of the United States Constitution should evolve over time is a matter of considerable debate, which is central to constitutional law and theory. Proponents of an evolving interpretation argue that the Constitution must be interpreted in the context of contemporary values, societal norms, and advancements in technology, thus necessitating a dynamic approach to its application. This view generally aligns with the concept of a "living Constitution," which suggests that the document was intended to be flexible and adaptable to changing circumstances.

In contrast, originalists believe that the Constitution’s meaning should be fixed, based on the intent of the Founders or the original understanding of the text at the time it was adopted. According to this perspective, changes to the Constitution should come through formal amendments, not through judicial interpretation.

Whether and how the Constitution should evolve involves considering the Constitution's purpose as a foundational legal document, the methods and principles of constitutional interpretation, and the balance between legal stability and adaptability.