What the Constitution Means to Me

In the second part of the play, Heidi stages a somewhat extemporaneous debate. In the original Broadway production, Heidi invited two local high school debating champions, Rosdely Ciprian (in “The Debate”) and Thursday Williams (in “Alternate Debate”), to rotate performances as Heidi’s opponent to participate in a parliamentary-style debate on whether the United States should abolish the Constitution. The published text includes transcripts of the debate from one night of each girls’ performances, although subsequent productions of the play should procure their own young debaters to argue extemporaneously rather than simply staging these transcripts. Rosdely, who is 15, introduces herself to the audience. She notes that the Constitution is complicated in that it both protects Americans and causes many of the nation’s problems, but for the sake of debate, Heidi and Rosdely will each take a side. Rosdely also disagrees with Heidi’s suggestion that the document is a crucible. Rather, she believes it is like a human being. It’s imperfect and incapable of perfection, but it is also able to be improved. Rosdely adds that the 9th amendment is like a character she once created, an AI that knows everything that has and will happen. Similarly, the 9th amendment “holds the memory of our future” (63).

In the audience, the ushers hand out pocket Constitutions for viewers to reference. Rosdely explains that their format isn’t standard for parliamentary debates but is rather one they created themselves, in which they alternate Proposition and Opposition in a POPOPO structure. Rosdely wins the coin toss and chooses to take the Opposition, which argues to keep the Constitution. Heidi will argue the Proposition, which is for abolishment. As they use their 90 seconds of prep time, Mike prepares the audience by urging them to respond loudly when they agree or disagree with points made by the debaters. He adds that one of the audience members will be tasked with picking the winner at the end. As the Proposition, Heidi first has two minutes to present her case for abolishing the Constitution. She begins by pointing out that the document was written by and for the benefit of white male landowners, suggesting that everyone else can search through the amendments to see when they “become full human beings in the eyes of this document” (67). Thomas Jefferson believed that each generation should produce a new Constitution. Heidi argues that men who have been dead for more than two centuries have no business governing the living in a world that they would no longer recognize.

Rosdely rebuts that it makes no sense to quote Jefferson, since he is also a dead man. Furthermore, as long as Congress is dominated by old white men, any new Constitution would still be created with the same biases. She argues that the Constitution is the oldest document of its kind to still be in use, and that is because it gives the American people “the tools we need to free ourselves from tyranny” (69). Under the Constitution, the country has become freer and more democratic. Frederick Douglass, who had been enslaved under the Constitution, still believed in it as it also contained the means to dismantle slavery. Heidi returns that as of 2017, the United States has been officially recategorized as no longer a full democracy. She points out the issues with the electoral college and with the immense power placed on nine unelected Supreme Court justices to define human rights, and how they fail daily to protect the most vulnerable communities. Next, Rosdely cross-examines and then rebuts, using Heidi’s woman-running-on-the-beach metaphor and acknowledging that she was listening from backstage. Rosdely argues that abolishing the Constitution could push the country into utter chaos. It may be imperfect, but it’s the only protection that most people have. Instead, they should “throw out the men who abuse it” (72).

Heidi cross-examines, pushing Rosdely to admit that the Supreme Court recently took away protections by overturning precedent, and the Constitution empowers them to do that. Each side has a minute to conclude. Heidi asserts that she once believed that the Constitution “was a tool of justice” (73), even if it were created by men who enslaved people, because it could change and evolve. Now, Heidi recognizes that the Constitution is successful in its original purpose of strengthening the power of wealthy white men. A negative-rights Constitution prevents change by protecting the status quo, whereas a positive-rights document would work actively to secure human rights. In Rosdely’s conclusion, she asserts that Heidi’s plan to abolish the Constitution is reckless and dangerous, and as a young person, it’s Rosdely’s future that would be at risk. She suggests that individuals position themselves to fight for change by protesting or running for office. The two women shake hands, and Heidi prompts Rosdely to choose a judge from the audience. She does, selecting (on the night that the transcript was taken) a woman named Amber.

Tasked with deciding whether to keep or abolish the Constitution, Amber votes to keep it. Heidi informs the audience that this means that they can keep the pocket Constitutions that were handed out before the debate. To conclude the evening, Heidi explains that she and Rosdely will answer some more personal questions that were proposed by last night’s audience. Tonight’s audience is encouraged to submit new questions on their way out after the show. The questions have been curated by the stage manager from audience submissions, but they are presented for the two women to answer them extemporaneously. The last question, however, should always be for Heidi’s teenaged opponent, asking something about her hopes or expectations for her own future. In the transcript, Heidi and Rosdely respond to questions about their favorite holidays and movies, or what they would perform for a dance contest. The last question asks Rosdely: “What do you imagine your life will be like in thirty years?” (79). Rosdely predicts that at age 44, “I’ll be… yeah. Old” (79), she’ll have a nice house and one child, and perhaps she’ll be a pediatrician—or possibly an actor. She adds, “I’ll be pretty happy. Yeah. Uh. That’s what I imagine” (79).