Passage A contends that legal interpretation should track the original public meaning of a constitutional text at the time of ratification, since only this fixed meaning constrains judges and prevents them from smuggling contemporary preferences into the law under the guise of interpretation. Passage B argues that original public meaning is frequently indeterminate on the questions modern courts must resolve, so that judges applying it inevitably supply the missing content themselves; Passage B concludes that appeals to original meaning function mainly to disguise, rather than eliminate, judicial discretion. Passage B grants that some constitutional provisions do have a determinate original meaning, yet maintains that this does not rescue original-meaning interpretation as a general constraint on judges.