Final answer:
Justice Stewart may be referring to several constitutional principles that embody a living and adaptable Constitution, incorporate judicial review, adhere to stare decisis, and ensure the well-being of citizens as referenced by various justices and legal scholars.
Step-by-step explanation:
- The great constitutional principle referred to by Justice Stewart encompasses several key aspects of judicial philosophy surrounding Constitutional interpretation. This question seems to infer the principle that encompasses a dynamic and adaptive view of the U.S. Constitution, which justices like William Brennan considered a "living" document.
- This view contends that constitutional interpretation should evolve to meet the demands of contemporary society while resolving issues with an understanding of equality aligned with present-day values. This is in contrast to an originalist perspective, which looks to interpret the Constitution solely within the context of its framers' original intent.
- Judicial review is another constitutional principle that might be referenced, as seen in the historic case where the Supreme Court established its authority to invalidate legislative acts repugnant to the Constitution. Additionally, stare decisis, the practice of adhering to precedent in decision-making, is a principle that guides justices in their interpretations and applications of law.
- Finally, the principle of ensuring the well-being of citizens within a juridical system aligned with government authority, as argued by John Rawls, might be considered a foundational principle referenced by justices when delivering opinions on cases affecting social welfare and human freedoms.