What belief holds that the Constitution is to be interpreted strictly?

The belief that the Constitution should be interpreted strictly is grounded in the concept of judicial restraint. This philosophy advocates for a limited role of the judiciary in interpreting laws and the Constitution, emphasizing that judges should adhere closely to the text of the Constitution and the original intent of its framers. Proponents of judicial restraint argue that the courts should avoid making laws or taking an active role in policy-making, thereby preserving a clear separation of powers and respecting the authority of elected officials.

In this view, any changes to constitutional interpretation or the law should come from the legislative branch, reflecting the will of the people, rather than from judicial decisions that could impose the personal views of judges. Judicial restraint thus promotes a conservative approach to constitutional interpretation, prioritizing the original meaning and application of the Constitution over more flexible interpretations that could adapt to contemporary issues or societal changes.