> the Bill of Rights only works because it's been endlessly litigated, developing a large body of specific interpretaions.
As a follow-on to that, it is still being litigated and the interpretations continue to shift over time.
For example, it wasn't until relatively recently that the Court began reading the Second Amendment in such a way as to limit the ability of jurisdictions to enact laws that prevent people from carrying firearms most places. Similarly, there is a current push to change the interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment as well.
Your central point is key: The Law is more about the judiciary's current understanding of what's written than what is actually written.
As a follow-on to that, it is still being litigated and the interpretations continue to shift over time.
For example, it wasn't until relatively recently that the Court began reading the Second Amendment in such a way as to limit the ability of jurisdictions to enact laws that prevent people from carrying firearms most places. Similarly, there is a current push to change the interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment as well.
Your central point is key: The Law is more about the judiciary's current understanding of what's written than what is actually written.