Strict constructionism is a philosophy of judicial interpretation that holds to the literal meaning of the words and phrases as used at the time of writing. Adherents look strictly at the text in question rather than relying on metaphysical ideas such as natural law or by trying to glean intent from contemporaneous commentaries.

See also: originalism
Contrast: judicial activism

Some argue that the term is vague and difficult to apply. Noting that it largely came into prominence as part of Richard Nixon's presidential campaign, they point to a memo written to Nixon explaining the term:

A judge who is a "strict constructionist" in constitutional matters will generally not be favorably inclined toward claims of either criminal defendants or civil rights plaintiffs—the latter two groups having been the principal beneficiaries of the Supreme Court's "broad constructionist" reading of the Constitution.[1] http://slate.msn.com/id/117140/

(William H. Rehnquist in a memo Richard Nixon about Supreme Court nominees)

Based on this, they claim the term is mostly code for judges who will support conservative causes, as opposed to a real theory of judicial interpretation.