@davidpakman A couple of more thoughts on this topic. First, if federal judges were truly meant to interpret the constitution based on evolving standards of decency in a society, then why aren’t they elected directly by that society? Why shield these judges from societal input that will make them more responsive to society’s interpretation of these evolving standards? Second, it is not the case that constitutional pragmatism always leads to more personal freedom. It’s not a one-way street. Look no further than the pragmatic decisions in Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty and Wickard v. Filburn that saw a radical curtailment in property rights and economic freedom theretofore enjoyed by citizens of the United States.