What you fail to appreciate is that almost all our laws were phrased ambiguously because laws needed to be passed but people wanted to avoid immediate conflict. As such, many disputes between the federalists and the Democratic-Republicans in the Early Republic centered around the courts, where the battles over interpretation played out.
Liberals complain that conservatives are misguided to believe Founder's intent is codified law, but any close examination of our legal history demonstrates that is the wrong criticism; "Author's intent" isn't a concept with uniform meaning, because the lawmakers intend ambiguously phrased language to mean different things.
Not statically either. A lawmaker's opinion of a law's meaning is set to change depending on a number of conditions.