Justice Thurgood Marshall Response Justice Thurgood Marshall said in his “Reflections on the Bicentennial of the United States Constitution”, “I do not believe the meaning of the Constitution was forever ‘fixed’ at the Philadelphia Convention. Nor do I find the wisdom, foresight, and sense of justice exhibited by the framers particularly profound. To the contrary, the government they devised was defective from the start, requiring several amendments, a civil war, and momentous social transformation to attain the system of constitutional government and its respect for the individual freedoms and human rights, that we hold as fundamental as today” (Marshall). In this passage of his essay, Judge Marshall is critical of the government that is
Taney’s opinion, on the other hand, would differ greatly from a Marshal opinion. Taney supports the dual federalism perspective, which holds that the state and national governments are equal in power, and places much emphasis on the Tenth Amendment. From Taney's opinion in Scott v. Sandford, it is evident that Taney holds an enclave view of the Tenth Amendment, meaning that there are areas of delegation specifically reserved to the states and the the federal government cannot intrude on. In the Scott v. Sandford ruling, Taney stated that Congress was out of line and had no power to regulate slavery in the territories. This court opinion invalidated the already repealed Missouri Compromise, demonstrating Taney’s support of the states overturning federal legislation that impeded on state sovereignty.
However, Hamilton, our first secretary of state, Thomas Jefferson usually never agreed with each other, but that didn’t stop Hamilton to create our first National Bank that was submitted on December 14, 1790. Unfortunately, not everybody liked Hamilton’s ideas because in 1804 Hamilton had died. (“Alexander Hamilton”). After Hamilton's death in 1804, Jonathan Dayton who was elected a seat in our first Congress, he still supported “Hamilton’s financial program” and was “pressed for suppression of the Whiskey Rebellion” (“Jonathan Dayton”). In the end, Hamilton showed leadership by creating our first National Bank, fought in our war like Odysseus fought for his men on his journey home from the Trojan, and wrote two-third of our new
The emancipation proclamation was one of the most earth-shattering events for slaves in America. President Abraham Lincoln began a long road to success to abolish slavery in the United States. The Emancipation Proclamation signed on January 1, 1862, did not free all slaves but only applied to the slaves that were in the South and placed not occupied by the federal military forces. The Border States such as Maryland, Kentucky, Delaware, and Missouri have not included Emancipation Proclamation. The order of the president was based on the constitutional authority of the president since the Congress did not pass the law (Carnahan, 2007).
When he read it, Lincoln denied that the states had ever possessed independent sovereignty as colonies and territories. Instead, he declared that states had accepted the sovereignty of the national government without conditions or restrictions when the Constitution was ratified. Unlike Buchanan’s boneless answers and statements, Lincoln answered with legal sense and common sense. He claimed that secession was an unconstitutional act of treason, and most northerners
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.
Many notable Supreme Court cases have depended on the 14th Amendment and its clauses. One of the first was Plessy vs. Ferguson, where the Supreme Court said that segregation was Constitutional as long as the facilities were “separate but equal.” Another famous Supreme Court case involving this Amendment was Brown vs. Board of Education. In this case, the Supreme Court concluded that the separate facilities weren’t equal, which violated the 14th Amendment, so they reversed the ruling of Plessy vs. Ferguson. If it weren’t for the 14th Amendment, these cases wouldn’t have happened and the Civil Right Movement may have never occurred. The Equal Protection of the Law clause has led to many advances in racial equality.
Party government believes that we need a “strong decisive government to solve social and economic problems”, but in order to do this we must be able to keep our government under control, as mentioned earlier (Hershey 301). All judges and justices share a commitment to uphold the Constitution making the United States a country governed by a rule of law. Roosevelt was no civil libertarian nor a crusader for racial justice but, his court-packing plan would not have endangered the Supreme Court 's legacy of ruling in favor of individual rights; the justices of his era showed little interest in protecting the rights that are actually protected by the Constitution (Milhiser Web). Studies over the last few decades have all come to the conclusion that court-packing is unconstitutional in nature, but what about interest groups? How can an interest groups influence courts as well?
The Continental Congress thought that it would be only a footnote in history, but the Declaration of Independence has clearly had more historical importance than that. The changes done by the Congress made the Declaration what we now know it as, and without them, the document never would have been ratified, which would have created a vastly different
If you really look at the bill of rights, it is a vague outline to some of the freedoms that the founding fathers didn’t have before. The Bill of rights has nothing to do with technology except when it comes to freedom of speech. The Bill of rights should never be messed with because
As tensions in Great Britain grew economically and politically, the American colony declared themselves an independent nation. Gaining their independence was significant, however, keeping it would be the challenge. The Americans knew a stable federal republic was essential to remaining independent, thus they created the Constitution. Although, the creation of the Constitution and the equality it ensues a controversial issue, the Constitution did not fulfil the job it was designed to do. The document did not establish a fair government.