Strict vs. Loose Interpretation of the Constitution Many argue what were the intentions of the Founding Fathers when creating the U.S Constitution. "Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases," quoted Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson believed in a strict view of the constitution while he was an advisor.
So a chosen few were helped make this conceivable, the Founding Fathers. The principal Founding Father and furthermore known as our first President would be George Washington. Other than him being most fit for the main leader of the United States, there are such a significant number of more explanations behind his commitment to the Constitution. He had understanding from the Revolutionary War, and from that it persuaded Washington that over the top worries for states' rights and states purview would be deadly to a successful national government. He was at that point understanding that states' rights were essential which winds up noticeably crucial when choosing our new government for the United States.
President Woodrow Wilson wrote “the he Constitution of the United States is not a mere lawyers’ document, it is a vehicle of life and its spirit is always the spirit of the age.” One must keep this fact in mind when comparing the Constitution and the Articles of Confederation. There was a vast difference in the “spirit of the age” when these documents were drafted. Coming on the heels of the Declaration of Independence and the war against England, and afraid of a dictatorship or a government that did not listen to its people, the Articles of Confederation (which will be referred to as AoC) were written it a way that gave more power to the states. The problem with this type of government was that it was too difficult to enact or enforce laws and the government could not collect enough taxes to support itself. I believe the Constitution did a better job of protecting liberties, specifically in the areas of the federal court system, representation of the people, and the levy of taxes.
This power caused principles in Jacksonian Democracy including Manifest Destiny. The idea of Manifest Destiny basically is the belief that America has the power to expand its borders to the western land and all of America from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean. This is destiny that was given to America from God supposedly and Jacksonian Democracy completely defends it. Also, Jackson believed in a limited federal government even though he wasn’t satisfied on the idea of a strong state government. Jacksonian’s agree with a “hands-on” approach to the economy meaning that the government to strong control over the countries economy.
During the time of the revolution, John Dickinson drafted the first constitution of the United States, the Articles of Confederation. The Articles of Confederation established a central government that consisted of just one body, a Congress. There were many strengths and weaknesses of the Articles. Many of the strengths of the Articles included the powers to declare war, make treaties, and borrow money. However, under the Articles, the national government was weak and states operated like independent countries.
This is where the Constitution of the United States of America was born and with it came the opposing views of the Federalists and the anti-Federalists. The Federalists were strong believers in the Constitution, and believed that this was the only way to achieve a just society where people could have life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Federalists were generally wealthy citizens whose profession, in most cases, was law, such as Federalist leader Alexander Hamilton, who studied law before becoming a politician. The supporters of this faction followed suit being “[p]ropertied and educated people" (National Constitution Center: Home). According to the Federalists, if the Constitution had parts to it that didn't work, it could be amended.
ALEXANDER HAMILTON AND A FEDERALIST NATION How an Outsider Shaped America’s Economic and Political Future Jason Carr U.S. Constitutional History, 460 Winter Term, 2013 THE EARLY LIFE OF ALEXANDER HAMILTON The basic tenants of federalism advocated by Alexander Hamilton have stood the test of time and contribute greatly to the financial and constitutional system in modern America. Federalism in the United States is the idea that the supreme power of a nation should reside within its central government making it sovereign over the various states. This became an important principle that was debated during the Constitutional Convention. Hamilton was an ardent believer that the states were incapable of uniting the people politically and economically.
Outline Although the founding of the Constitution was a revolutionary, positive turning-point in American history, the US Constitution has a few unconstitutional and democratic shortcomings. Introduction In order to understand the shortcomings of democracy of the US Constitution, is it is important to know the background of its’ founding and how each article serves our country. Federalist No. 10, written by James Madison, asserts the importance of having the image of a democracy without its real substance. There seems to have been a very strong opposition towards democracy at the Constitutional Convention, although the framers were in the midst of creating democratic principles to appeal to the majority of the country.
Founding Fathers: James Madison I believe that James Madison made the most significant impact on our government. Madison was appropriately nicknamed “The Father of the Constitution” He played a key role in founding America. He wrote a sizeable amount of The Federalist Papers. He co-founded the Democrat-Republican party. Madison was also one of the top contributors at the Constitutional Convention and he drafted the Constitution.
3. ‘The Human Right Act has revolutionized the way in which judges interpret statutes’. The judiciary practice in interpreting statutes has long been subject to the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty, which asserts the hierarchical relationship between the judiciary and Parliament in which the Parliament is the supreme law-making body. This was also stressed by Lord Scarman in Duport Steels Ltd v. Sirs: In the field of statute law the judge must be obedient to the will of Parliament as expressed in the enactments. In this field Parliament makes and unmakes the law, the judge’s duty is to interpret and to apply the law, not to change it to meet the judge’s idea of what justice requires.