Abstract: An essay is presented on whether the theory of originalism of constitutional language is a rationalization for conservatism or a principled theory of interpretation. Several arguments on how constitutional language should be interpreted are that it should reflect the Framers' intent, how it is understood by the ratifiers, and the original public meaning of the constitutional language. The essayist explains that when practical consequences and political valences are not taken into consideration in the generality of cases, rationalization occurs.