The Constitution "Understood" Essay

686 words - 3 pages

The Jeffersonian-Republicans are characterized by their strict interpretation of the constitution, in stark contrast with the Federalists loose or broad interpretation. The Federalists believed that anything the constitution did not forbid it permitted, contrary to the Jeffersonian view that anything it did not permit it forbade. The Federalists advocated the “necessary” and “proper” clause, and their faith rested heavily in the virtue of implied powers. The Jeffersonian party believed that all powers not specifically granted to the central government were reserved to the states, disregarding the implication of inferred powers. In the late 1700’s both Jefferson and Madison organized an opposition to Hamilton, a federalist. During Jefferson and Madison’s presidencies, the strict constructionism on which they based their growing party remained evident.
     The Jeffersonian-Republicans were strong supporters of states rights; they believed that these rights were jeopardized by a strong central government. Thomas Jefferson expresses this concern when talking with a future member of his cabinet, Gideon Granger. He commences “I believe we shall obtain…a majority in the legislature of the United States, attached to the preservation of the federal constitution” . Preserving the federal constitution means upholding it “according to its obvious principles and those on which it was known to be received” . This emphasizes Jefferson’s strong belief in a “literal” constitution opposed to an “implied” constitution. Jefferson goes on to say that “our country can never be harmonious and solid while so respectable a portion of its citizens support principles which go directly to a change of the federal Constitution” . This is a direct reference to the supporters of the Federalist Party and its “loose” interpretation of the nation’s charter. In this statement Jefferson expresses a belief that the Federalist Party is threatening the Union.
     One of the major aspects of the Federalist argument is that anything not forbade in the Constitution is permitted, while the Republicans commend the contrary. Jefferson displays his support for the latter, while speaking with, Presbyterian minister, Samuel Miller. Regarding the...

Find Another Essay On The Constitution "Understood"

Interpretation of the U.S. Constitution Essay

1304 words - 5 pages leave room for interpretations from a modern prospective. Scalia argues in his September 1988 lecture series “Originalism: The Lesser Evil” that modern day shouldn’t change how the Constitution is understood and upheld. In this lecture series, Scalia talks about where the lines can be crossed with nonoriginalism. “But why, one must reasonably ask – once the original import of the Constitution is cast aside to be replaced by the fundamental

The constitution. Essay

690 words - 3 pages , considering the amount of land was considered a steel. Jefferson couldn't refuse. The only question was whether buying the land was Constitutional. You see, no where in the Constitution does it say that buying land from a foreign country is illegal. Does that make it implied as illegal or left out because it should be understood that it's legal? Jefferson, usually a supporter of strict construction (if it's not in the constitution its illegal), would

The Federalist Papers and the Birth of a Nation

1268 words - 5 pages Federalist constructors of the Constitution that they understood the need for a social hierarchy without having to resort to defining a rigid class system, instead allowing for a dynamic and flexible one. In order to understand the evolution of the American Constitution as a document that both created individual liberty and helped to mold a class system, it is fair to compare it to the form of constitution that evolved in Britain since the

Judicial Review

1062 words - 4 pages concern was the fact that these judges were not elected by the people to be a negotiator to all government affairs including issues involving the courts themselves (Thomas Jefferson on, n.d.). Jefferson was in the opinion that if he understood the Constitution correctly then the judicial branch of the government had the right to make rules for the government and that this judicial act makes “our Constitution a complete felo de se, act of suicide

The Seventeenth Amendment

1185 words - 5 pages legislature. It also allows for the governor of a state to appoint a senator in the event of an opening, until an election occurs. The Framers of the Constitution understood that federalism would be protected mainly by the way senators were elected, with the powers of the federal government limited to the enumerated powers within the constitution and all other powers being retained by the states or the people. The people were represented in the House


4043 words - 16 pages The Universal Declaration of human Rights shares a lot in common with the Ugandan constitution. "The 1995 constitution gives hope for enjoyment of Human Rights and governance compared to its predicessors"1 Below is a survey into the relationship between the two documents. It should be noted however that there are both similarities and differences. Many Ugandan laws, as well as some sections in the Constitution, contravene the provisions of the

Well, is it ALIVE or ISN’T it?

980 words - 4 pages problems of THEIR era. But, unlike today’s Congress, they also understood that they didn’t know EVERYTHING. And, so, they built an element of sheer genius into the Constitution: a way for US to change it if necessary. Note however, they didn’t encourage whim-born changes. This is evidenced by the fact that they made it extremely difficult to change the document. It requires tons of perseverance and untold hours of work (measureable sometimes

Federalists vs. Democratic Republicans

620 words - 2 pages who were very much Anglophiles. They loved Britain and all things British. The Federalists felt that there should be a loose constructionist interpretation of the constitution. They believed that there were things implied by or simply understood by the wording of the Constitution. According to the Federalists, just because something was not specifically written in the Constitution doesn't mean that it wasn't covered or addressed as something that

Justification and Weaknesses of the Non-Interpretive Model

1654 words - 7 pages Justification and Weaknesses of the Non-Interpretive Model The question of Constitutional interpretation still has yet to be resolved. Should only the explicit commands of our nation's Founding Fathers be referenced in courts of law, or can it be justified that an outside body should extrapolate from the specific text of the Constitution to define and defend additional fundamental rights? Further, if this body, namely the Supreme Court

The Reign of Bush-Obama and their Power

1777 words - 8 pages , McCulloch v. Maryland, Chief Justice Marshall argues that if the Constitution accounted for every single power for every position, the common people would not have understood it because it would have been too large and the meaning would have been lost in transition. In addition, the Constitution, according to Marshall should be like a “great outline”, where small powers are given to the President, and that these outlines should have the important

The American Constitution and Drug War

2069 words - 8 pages Constitution. However, examining these clauses, only one meaning would seem ratifiable: what the people and states ratifying the Constitution would have understood the meaning of these clauses to be. Moreover, a clear understanding of these clauses will dictate faithful obeisance to its meaning, and not transgression; for if the life of the drug war hangs on a breach of the constitution, justice demands remediation. Understanding the Supremacy clause and

Similar Essays

The British Constitution Essay

661 words - 3 pages /outlines the fundamental laws of how the state is governed, as it also contains an “unwritten” part to it as well. The complexity of the British constitution is a result of its history; this feat of “unwritten” constitution can be understood by Britain’s historical events as such events led to its current state of constitution including the “unwritten” part of it. It is important to note that even the Queen stated that “the British constitution has

Originalist Essay

1051 words - 5 pages that counts is how the words used in the Constitution would have need understood at the time.” (Bork) The other theories are not proper use for interpretation of the constitution. A Natural Law theorist being blinded by the idea of a higher moral law. A law that questions our consciences and above all a law above a law. When interpreting the constitution one must not have their own feeling mix into the decision-making. They need to have an

Supreme Court Cases Mc Culloch Vs Madison

572 words - 2 pages constitution are listed. These are called enumerated powers. Others, called implied powers, are understood as given because they are needed to help carry out the enumerated powers. The federal government has only those powers that are enumerated and implied in the constitution. However, when the federal government is using powers that do belong to it, the states must give way. This case clarified which power pertains to which government.I believe

The History Of The United States Constitution

1735 words - 7 pages obeyed by those who rule. (Harr, 2012) The delegates understood that the people held the power and wanted the Constitution to reflect as such. The first debate that went on during the convention was regarding the Virginia Plan. The plan provided that the government would be separated into three branches, the legislative, executive, and judicial. (Farrand, 1913) Smaller states backed the New Jersey plan, calling for only modest revision in the