Strict constructionism
Strict constructionism (Alexandrian: constructionnisme strict; Martino: construccionismo estricto) is a legal and constitutional philosophy in Nouvelle Alexandrie that advocates interpreting the Proclamation of Punta Santiago and federal statutes according to their plain text and original meaning, without inferring powers or rights not explicitly enumerated. The term was popularized by Deputy Daniel Valkory, Jr. (FHP-FCD) in a series of speeches and articles beginning in 1750 AN, in which he argued that judges and legislators should resist the temptation to expand the meaning of constitutional provisions beyond what the drafters of the Proclamation intended in 1685 AN. Valkory, whose father Daniel Valkory authored several foundational laws including the Cortes Federales Act, 1694, has described strict constructionism as "fidelity to the text as written, not as we might wish it to be written," and has criticized what he calls "interpretive drift," whereby courts gradually expand federal authority through creative readings of ambiguous clauses. The philosophy has found support among FHP jurists and some members of the Federal Consensus Party, while critics, particularly from the Democratic Socialist Party, argue that strict constructionism fails to account for changed circumstances and can produce unjust outcomes by privileging historical intent over contemporary needs. Strict constructionism is often contrasted with living constitutionalism, which holds that the Proclamation should be interpreted in light of evolving social values and conditions.
