James Madison, the principal author of the Constitution, knew that grave doubts would be cast on the Constitution if those states (the home states of several of its chief architects, including Madison himself) did not adopt it. During the ratification debate in Virginia, Madison promised that a bill of rights would be added after ratification. His promise reassured the
Tyranny back then was harsh ownership of one individual, because of tyranny the constitution was doubted. So they fixed the constitution and made sure that the constitution could guard against tyranny.The constitution helps guards against tyranny by using a system of checks and balances and by having a separation of power within the constitution. The constitution guards against tyranny by using a system of checks and balances. Checks and balances are a way for the three branches to check up on each other and make sure everything is going smoothly. According to James Madison, Federalist paper #51, 1788, this helps us guard against tyranny by letting the three branches check up on each other and makes sure that the branches are fair to the rules that are applied.
Ratification of the Constitution by some states was based on the expectation that the Constitution would be changed by amendments such as these. Madison originally drafted 19 amendments, 12 of which his congressional colleagues passed on to the states for their approval. On December 15, 1791, 10 had been approved by enough states to become part of the Constitution. These amendments guarantee our individual rights as citizens, such as the freedom of speech, religion and in the First Amendment. In 1785 Madison had written one of the most significant essays regarding separation of religion and government, which no doubt gave him inspiration for some of the Bill of
Woodrow Wilson, the 28th president of the United States, once said, “The Constitution was not made to fit us like a straight jacket. In its elasticity lies its chief greatness.” In 1787 the delegates from twelve out of thirteen sates attended the Constitutional Convention. They threw away the Articles of Confederation and wrote Constitution of the United States. Many residences were hesitant to the sudden change, but as time went along people came around to the fact that the Constitution was useful. Although the Constitution is viewed as completely binding, it does allow for changes to be made, giving it flexibility to the changing times.
September 17th 1787-The signing of the U.S. Constitution Importance: The signing of the United States Constitution is important to the history of the United States because it was written as a set of laws for the people of the United States to live by. The United States Constitution works well because it is written in a way where it does not give too much power to one section of the government, but is written where they have to work together. The United States Constitution was written to replace the articles of confederation. There was convention convened in Philadelphia to revise the articles of confederation on May 14th 1787, but the convention was postponed from day to day until there was at least a representative from seven states to
Many Americans who were not wealthy supported the Constitution was because they believed that the United States needed a new and stronger national government. They believed that this government could provide the stability and security against violent outrages. The foil of these people were the Antifederalist. The Antifederalists offered three objections: that the Congress had conspired under a “veil of mystery” to create a new form of government, that a strong national government would destroy states’ rights, and that the new system of government resembled and monarchy and that violated the principle of liberty that guided the American Revolution. They also pointed that the voters will not directly
During this period, the Anti-Federalists felt as though the aristocrats had no particular opinion about our future government, which alarmed the group. Because they saw aristocrats as overpowering the opinions of those who are not as noble. The writer states that he would rather be a free citizen of the Republic of Massachusetts than succumb to a great American Empire. The Federalist goes on to say that unless there is some security of the people 's liberties, the new Constitution will not be successful. The writer had full faith in the citizens of the United States to decide what was best for the future of the
Scalia has changed and strengthened the views of others by using his voice. Scalia believes in originalism. This is the idea of interpreting the constitution the way it was meant by the people who ratified it over 200 years ago. This is the idea that the constitution should be durable. This durability should not be seen as flexibility considering that would be changing the intent for the nation they created.
They were scared of tyranny, especially pertaining to the fact that under the new Constitution, the national government, or Congress, would be able to make decisions without even asking for the states’ permission. (Anti-Federalist 1: Brutus). Even though the Constitution called for checks and balances, Anti-Federalist Patrick Henry, was convinced that the president would be the one making all the decisions, not unlike a king. (Bianco and Canon, 44). The national supremacy clause in the Constitution even stated that national law supersedes any state law when there is conflict.
The constitution was the collective child of (9 of 13) STATES. Some of those states, like Virginia, only ratified this document by 53% a small majority, by representatives, not the people directly voting. 9:13 is 69% if that requirement of 69% was imposed on each state to ratify, this constitution would not exist. Not overwhelming popular at the time, but pushed hard by the likes of Hamilton; creator of, the bank of New York, a global bank. Some of those, reluctant and suspicious of this new Centralized Power wanted more protections for the people that had fought and won their independence from another Central Power, the King; thus the Bill of Rights, after the ratification, "We must pass it first" Sound familiar?