Should congress have the power to interpret the constitution? write a paragraph in which you argue for or against the wide application of the implied powers.

Some parts of the constitutions are pretty ambiguous, but congress should try to stick with what ever the most original meaning seems to be. The 2nd amendment says that all states have the right to a well regulated militia. There is no place that addresses private gun ownership, although hunting guns were extremely important to Americans living in rural areas or on frontier. If we were to interpretation the Constitution as closely as possible, only hunting weapons would be allowed. The national guard serves as our militia. Republicans deviate from the 2nd amendment, and then call on it's (mis) interpretation as it (and as pleases the NRA). The Constitution may not be clear on everything, but we should try to stick with it as much as possible. I think our founding fathers would have been horrified if they saw hill billies running around with AKs Capable of murdering several dozen people with in a minute. They'd think we were freaking crazy

The answer would be a. i am not 100 percent sure but i think its correct.