Lawanda just didn't want to change her stance on capital punishment, but jack's argument did make her think twice about her position. however, instead of being persuaded, lawanda dismissed the arguments by deeming jack's facts unreliable. how has lawanda responded to her own cognitive dissonance in this instance?

Edwin meese, former attorney general, from a speech delivered in 1985 (excerpted): “those who framed the constitution chose their words carefully; they debated at great length the most minute points. the language they chose meant something. it is incumbent upon the court to determine what that meaning was… “it is our belief that only ‘the sense in which the constitution was accepted and ratified by the nation,’ and only the sense in which laws were drafted and passed provide a solid foundation for adjudication. any other standard suffers the defect of pouring new meaning into old words, thus creating new powers and new rights totally at odds with the logic of our constitution and its commitment to the rule of law.” based on this quote, would you label meese as being a loose constructionist or an originalist? why? explain your reasoning in complete sentences and in your own words.