Originalists often hold that it is incorrect to use the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to strike down laws that discriminate because
What are your choices? What is your answer?
laws that discriminate must be said to reflect the will of the majority.
they believe that the original intent behind the Equal Protection Clause was to prohibit racial discrimination specifically, and not to address other forms of discrimination such as gender, sexual orientation, or disability.
If you want to understand why originalists hold this view, it is helpful to first understand their approach to constitutional interpretation. Originalists generally believe that the meaning of the Constitution should be understood based on the original intent of its framers and the public understanding at the time of its enactment. They argue that the Constitution is a fixed document and its meaning should not change over time, unless formally amended through the established process.
To determine the original intent behind the Equal Protection Clause, originalists examine historical sources such as constitutional conventions, debates, and writings by the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment. They often point out that the primary concern during those times was racial discrimination against African Americans, particularly in the aftermath of the Civil War and the abolition of slavery.
Originalists argue that expanding the scope of the Equal Protection Clause to include other forms of discrimination goes beyond its originally intended meaning. They believe that such expansions should be left to the democratic process, where changes to societal norms and cultural attitudes can be addressed through legislation or constitutional amendments, rather than through judicial interpretation.
However, it is important to note that not all legal scholars and judges agree with the originalist interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause. There are alternative schools of thought, such as the "Living Constitution" approach, which argue that the Constitution should be interpreted in light of evolving societal values and changing circumstances.
In the end, it's a complex and ongoing debate within the field of constitutional law, and different perspectives exist on the proper interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause and its application to various forms of discrimination.