Many Americans were shocked to learn about Georgetown University Professor Louis Michael Seidman’s advocation for the U.S. to abandon the Constitution — the central document that has helped spawn America’s growth and progression for hundreds of years. As previously reported, the constitutional expert recently noted his belief (via an op-ed) that a blind allegiance to the outdated document is perilous. On Friday, he defended his controversial views about some purportedly “evil” provisions in the Constitution in an interview with Fox News’ Megyn Kelly.

Megyn Kelly Challenges Professor Who Wants America to Give Up U.S. Constitution (Plus: Judge Napolitano Reacts!)

Photo Credit: Fox News

Similar to his statements in his New York Times piece, Seidman argued that it is misguided to follow the advice of men who lived centuries ago.

“This is our country. We live in it. We have the right to have the kind of country that we want,” he told Kelly. “I’m not very happy with having a bunch of folks who have been dead for over 200 years…telling us what kind of country we have.”

While he admitted that the Founding Fathers were right about many sentiments, he also doubled-down on the fact that the Constitution includes some elements that he has described as “evil.” Kelly countered his argument, challenging that the amendment process was foreseen by the Founders and that changes to the document are more-than possible. Thus, she asked why abandoning it is a necessity.

Seidman responded by explaining how difficult making amendments can be, calling out the process as one of the biggest problems with the U.S. Constitution.

“Of all the constitutions in the world, the American Constitution is the most difficult to amend,” he proclaimed. “It’s only been amended 27 times — only 17 times if you don’t count the Bill of Rights.”

Kelly had a difficult time imagining an America without a Constitution and repeatedly asked the professor to explain what would replace the core document as “the rule of law.” Rather than getting into specifics, Seidman noted that many elements should be kept in place. The protection of civil liberties and the Second Amendment were two sentiments that he mentioned.

While he called the Constitution “beautiful” and the preamble “poetic,” he was unbending on his belief that allegiance to it is no longer warranted and that it has created an ineffective system.

Watch these comments here:

 

Also on Friday, Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst Andrew Napolitano appeared on “Fox & Friends,” where he took aim at Seidman’s constitutional assessment, dismissing the professor’s take on the historical document. Of particular note, without it, Napolitano warned that the U.S. government would have too much power.

“Think of it this way – the purpose of the Constitution is to govern the government, to restrain it, to make sure Congress writes the laws, the president enforces the laws, the courts interpret the laws,” he said, claiming that the “brilliant” document ensures that power isn’t concentrated too heavily in any one place.

“The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. If you want to amend it, amend it, but you can’t overlook it,” he added.

Watch these statements, below:

Related: