I imagine if it did, we&#x27;d still be having a similar discussion. Without certain events by the court that reset or reaffirm interpretations, Constitutional &quot;wandering&quot; can run amok (see Interstate Commerce Clause and the War on Drugs).<p>District of Columbia v. Heller comes to mind, where the court confirmed a particular reading of the Second Amendment. In 50 years they&#x27;ll probably have to reaffirm it again. Or they could go a different way...<p>I can easily imagine a bizzaro world where the Fourth Amendment does contain the word privacy, and the court has had to reaffirm or reinterpret what &quot;privacy&quot; means in context over and over.<p>PS - best comment of the night, nitrogen.