Regrettably, on Jan. 24, The Advocate chose to publish an article by Michael Gerson in which he criticizes Ted Cruz because Cruz “espouses ‘a constitutionalism’ that would disqualify much of modern government.”

Hopefully, Gerson is simply ignorant of the founding principles of our government.

Most of us understand that the U.S. is the greatest country for the reason that our country’s foundation is based upon the constitutional principles of a limited national government, with three, coequal branches of government, with a separation of powers and a system of checks and balances.

However, to Gerson and his ilk, such “constitutionalism” is inconsistent with the liberal concept of modern government, which believes we must have a “living Constitution” that the “modern” meaning of words today is not the same as the meaning when written.

Our Constitution provides that the president must take an oath to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.” We have a legislative branch, an executive branch and a judicial branch. Nevertheless, Barack Obama and his supporters believe that if Congress will not enact the legislation he wants, he may simply do it by executive order. Presumably, Gerson believes that such “unconstitutionalism” fits the needs of “modern government.”

Similarly, in order to meet the needs of modern times, our Supreme Court discovers new rights in the Constitution by reinterpreting, modifying and revising it. If having a baby is inconvenient, then the mother, but not the father, has a constitutional right to kill the baby.

“Equal protection” suddenly means that two people of the same sex have the right to “marriage.”

The power of taxation may now be used to force the purchase of government-regulated health care. Find that in the Constitution.

Does modern government require that our “living Constitution” be interpreted to discover such “rights” that have previously been denied?

Gerson would disqualify Cruz because he believes that, as president, Cruz would “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.” Gerson and the left do not believe in the validity of, or even the need for, the Ninth and 10th Amendments. They believe that the “modern” national government should have the unlimited power to control and regulate everything.

Richard T. Regan

retired attorney Metairie