Judicial activism raises the question whether the people, through their elected representatives, should make decisions about social policy issues or whether these decisions will be made by appointed members of the federal judiciary. Through a series of judicial decisions, many basic social problems have become nationalized. Yet the U.S. Constitution originally intended that the states would tend to such matters as education, criminal justice, and the general welfare, morality, and health of their communities. Good constitutional government requires full allegiance to the structural design of the Constitution, and a due regard for the purposes and principles for which that structural design stands. A jurisprudence of original intention--adhering to the original intent of the framers of the Constitution--would give back to the people the power to decide basic social policy issues and restore democratic self-government. It is a way of constitutional thinking, litigating and judging that seeks to grant people ample latitude to choose answers for themselves. (SM)