ipl-logo

Should The Courts Seek The Original Meaning Of The Constitution

875 Words4 Pages

I don’t think the courts should seek the original meaning of the Constitution. The Framers of the Constitution were intelligent people. They designed our Constitution to stand the test of time. They wrote the constitution not only to address their current issues, but to establish the basic principles that would sustain a new nation for the future. Today this can be broken down once again to a Republican vs Democratic debate. About 69 percent of Republicans say the justices should base their rulings on the Constitution’s original meaning rather than on what it means in current times. About 70 percent of Democrats say the court should base its rulings on an understanding of the Constitution’s meaning in current times. The Framers wanted a constitution …show more content…

The Framers thought majority rule to be the best system of government, but they also knew it was imperfect. They understood that political majorities may be tempted to enact laws that establish their own authority. Framers intended courts to play a central role in addressing these concerns. When supporters of the original Constitution argued in 1789 that a bill of rights would be pointless because political majorities would step on its guarantees, Thomas Jefferson responded that this argument ignored “the legal check” that could be exercised by the courts. When the Framers said "Men” in the Constitution it often meant males only. Like excluding women from voting. At the time it made sense to them, but it wouldn’t fit in today’s world. When they talked about freedom of the Press, they were thinking of paper documents, but that doesn't mean that the government should then have free rein to censor and control electronic communication. Over the years, there have been amendments to the Constitution, and most of them have stood the test of time. If there were no amendments, there would be no guarantee of free speech, religion, and there might even still be

Show More
Related

10th Amendment Pros And Cons Essay

608 Words | 3 Pages

Justice Stephens wrote the majority opinion stating that the power to vote for legislative members should be directly chosen by the people, not by the States. Powell v. McCormack established that the Qualification Clause for Congress listed in the Constitution are exclusive and the “fundamental principle of our representative democracy.” Adding such limitations to candidates takes away the direct vote from the people and destroys the “uniform national system” that the Constitution wanted for Congress. The Framers recognized that electing the legislature was a new idea that stemming from the Constitution, thus, not a right of the “original powers” of the states. The court also concluded that Framers divested the states of any power to add qualifications, because there was no right before the ratification of the Constitution.

Read More

Hope Of The Framers To Enter Public Life By Jack N. Rakove

815 Words | 4 Pages

The establishment of the Constitution after the failed Articles of Confederation remains a source of controversy among American citizens even in modern times. In his essay “The Hope of the Framers to Recruit Citizens to Enter Public Life,” Jack N. Rakove accurately argues that the Constitution was meant to be an avenue for the people to enter into and be involved in politics, and for the government to be involved in the peoples’ lives in order to ensure a non-autocratic future for the new nation. An element of the Constitution through which the Framers ensured the freedom and political participation of American citizens was the Bill of Rights. “The principal result of the ratification debates was the acceptance of an idea that the framers

Read More

Compare And Contrast The Three Fifths Compromise

1157 Words | 5 Pages

In Massachusetts, the Anti-Federalists, led by James Madison, argued that the Bill of Rights was necessary to protect people rights from the government because the government might get too powerful and hurt people’s rights and freedom. They had this fear because they suffered from the British tyranny and worried that the highly centralized government would make the miserable history happen again. Nevertheless, in favor of the government, the Federalists insisted that the Bill of Rights were unnecessary because the Constitution already limited the power of government, so it would not get too powerful. Also, they worried that people might forget to list certain rights in the Bill of Rights, so if later they were fighting for their rights that were not written in the document, the government might use it against them. Eventually, a compromise was made through a vote in Massachusetts; Anti-Federalists agreed to ratify the Constitution without the Bill of Rights, but they should also submit amendments for the Congress to consider adding the Bill of Rights.

Read More

Elastic Clause

933 Words | 4 Pages

Woodrow Wilson once referred to the Supreme Court as “a constant constitutional convention in continuous session”, due to the role they have played in interpreting the constitution as it is written. Due to the ambiguity found in much of the phrasing in the constitution, judicial interpretation of the constitution can be considered both necessary and inevitable (Comer, Gruhl et al., 2001). The courts have the power to declare unconstitutional the actions of the other branches and units of the government in what is known as judicial review (Tannahil, 2002). The first case in which the court elaborated on the principle of judicial review was that of Marbury v. Madison in 1803 and put forward that in the case of conflict between the constitution and a statute, it is “the duty of the judicial department to say what the law is” (Smith, 1975). Following this, the case of Fletcher v Peck (1810) is of equal importance as it was the first case in which a state law was declared by the court to be unconstitutional.

Read More

Pros And Cons Of The Framers

172 Words | 1 Pages

After many drafts and many hot days in a convention room surrounded by men you either hated or admired, the Framers wrote a “near-perfect” constitution that would compromise for the popular needs of most, most importantly, getting rid of factions. The Framers introduced a way to eliminate the chances of a large faction taking over and ruling for personal interests by forming a large national government, unifying all 13 states. In addition to a large national government extinguishing factions, the Constitution also pledged to make sure everyone was represented, including less populous states, by proposing the Senate and The House of Representatives, 2 elected Senators, and a certain number of representatives based on a states population. To

Read More

Differences Between The Articles Of Confederation And The Anti-Federalists

1100 Words | 5 Pages

They believed it was essential that individual rights were explicitly stated so that citizens were informed and could defend their own liberty (Cornell, 2012). The Federalists initially believed that a Bill of Rights was not necessary, as the states retained any rights and powers not explicitly granted to the federal government. Seeking to get the Constitution ratified, the Federalists agreed to write a Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights Institute, a non-profit foundation that aims to educate students, explains: The Bill of Rights is a list of limits on government power. For example, what the Founders saw as the natural right of individuals to speak and worship freely was protected by the First Amendment’s prohibitions on Congress from making laws establishing a religion or abridging freedom of speech.

Read More

The Pros And Cons Of Congressional Dysfunction

666 Words | 3 Pages

Therefore, they created the legislative branch to draft and pass policy, the executive branch to approve (or disapprove) and implement said legislation, and a judicial branch to guarantee compliance with the Constitution. Additionally, the Framers understood that democracy was a fragile enterprise, with success and stability hinging on requirements of compromise and deliberation (Roche, 1961). Furthermore, the Framers envisioned that the United States political system punctuated by ‘balance’, where each branch of government appropriately asserts its authority and does not acquiesce to the whims of another (Lane and Oreskes,

Read More

Bill Of Rights Dbq

267 Words | 2 Pages

After the Constitution was sent to states for ratification, the people felt the Constitution did not protect the natural rights of the American citizens. The cause or reason for this addition to the Constitution was to ensure that the rights detailed in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were not thought to be the only possible rights of American citizens. The Anti-Federalists, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and George Mason, said that if certain rights weren't specifically granted to the people, the government would easily take over these rights and abuse the people in the country. The Federalists, George Washington, John Adams, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, said that the Constitution give the government to do things that were

Read More

Framers Vs Democracy

526 Words | 3 Pages

It can be argued that the framers believed that a privilege majority should rule in the name of all the other people, with just a small amount of participation from the

Read More

Loose Vs Loose Interpretation Essay

689 Words | 3 Pages

Loose Versus Strict Interpretation     The constitution today is used in a loose interpretation. Although it is questioned by many Democratic republicans who believe that the constitution should be interpreted in a stricter manner. While the Federalists debate the government should have a loose construction. Both parties fear that the united states will be in danger without their views.     Who came up with these vastly different views of government, you might ask.

Read More

Nonoriginalism And The Constitution

425 Words | 2 Pages

The concept of nonoriginalism was not very popular in the beginning of these two methods of interpretation because people thought that they should not question the framer’s intent. Nonoriginalism refers to people that believe that the framers of the Constitution did not intend for there words to be taken directly in context because there is no way that a single document can lay out guidelines for everything that might happen in the future of the government. Scalia writes, “Marshal was saying that the Constitution had to be interpreted generously because the powers conferred upon Congress under it had to be broad enough to serve not only the needs of the federal government originally discerned but also the needs that might arise in the future”

Read More

The Constitution Pros And Cons Essay

1551 Words | 7 Pages

The people made the Constitution, and the people can unmake it. It is the creature of their own will, and lives only by their will. - Chief Justice John Marshall [19 U.S. 64] THE COMMON PERCEPTION is that the Constitution has endured essentially un-changed for more than 220 years and should remain that way except for an occa¬sional, narrowly-defined amendment. For that matter, neither the Congress, nor the presidency, nor the Supreme Court has changed much pro forma. The limited number and scope of formal amendments demonstrates this.

Read More

Robert Yates Anti Federalist 17 Summary

445 Words | 2 Pages

The Anti- Federalists claimed the Constitution gave the central government an excessive amount of power, and while not a Bill of Rights the folks would be in danger of oppression. Both Hamilton and Madison argued that the Constitution did not want a Bill of Rights, that it might produce a "parchment barrier" that restricted the rights of the folks, as critical protective

Read More

Why Do We Need To Keep The Supreme Court Essay

1957 Words | 8 Pages

We need to protect the principles that have defined America for more than 200 years. In recent years, talking about reforming the Supreme Court has become popular. However, in today's world, one of the topics known as court-packing is only a debate because some political parties take issue with rulings that don't go their

Read More

Persuasive Essay On The Declaration Of Independence

499 Words | 2 Pages

They believed that the government should only justify using its power with the consent of the people. The Founders made sure of this by implementing principles into the constitution, which not only gave power to the people, but also limited the government to grant equality, and fairness throughout the country. Today, a current issue that is supported by this is the debate of Proposition 8, which attempts to prevent same-sex couples from becoming married. This falls under the Fourteenth Amendment, the equal protection laws, provided many people see that preventing their marriage oppresses these individuals, and takes away their birthrights. Everyone has to vote on passing this proposition.

Read More

More about Should The Courts Seek The Original Meaning Of The Constitution

Related Topics

Open Document