Originalists often hold that it is incorrect to use the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to strike down laws that discriminate because?
1 it runs contrary to the 10th Amendment.
2 laws that discriminate must be said to reflect the will of the majority.
3 it was not intended to protect people against discrimination.
4 it was only intended to protect the rights of newly freed slaves and no others.
Number 3
I say 3 too
The correct answer is 3: it was not intended to protect people against discrimination.
Originalists generally argue that the meaning of the Constitution should be interpreted based on the original understanding of its framers at the time it was adopted. They believe that the Constitution should be applied in accordance with its original intent, rather than being adapted to modern societal attitudes or changing circumstances.
In the case of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, originalists argue that it was primarily intended to protect newly freed slaves and to ensure their equal rights and protection under the law. They do not view the Equal Protection Clause as a broad prohibition on all types of discrimination.
To get the answer to this question, one can consider the original intent of the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment by examining historical documents such as the drafting debates, constitutional conventions, and writings from that time period. Additionally, studying legal opinions from key figures in American history, such as Chief Justice John Marshall and Justice Joseph Story, who helped shape the original understanding of the Constitution, can provide further insight into the intended scope and purpose of the Equal Protection Clause.