Thomas Jefferson’s and Alexander Hamilton’s viewpoints during the 1790’s and the 1800’s were very different but sort of similar. Jefferson wanted the government to be run by the people of the U.S. while Hamilton wanted the wealthy class to run it, Jefferson wanted strong state government, Hamilton wanted strong federal government. But one thing that stood out to the people was Hamilton wanted a loose/lenient interpretation of the constitution as Jefferson wanted a strict one. During the 1700’s-1800’s, despite the fact Philadelphia was the nation’s temporary capital, U.S. Congress met difficulties and fears that tested the strength of the Constitution and the republic it built. The nation had a few domestic issues of finance, taxation, and slavery that separated the delegates into unpleasant political groups which caused international relations disagreements and second thoughts.
Jefferson uses loose interpretation to say that the federal government does have the power to regulate commerce, while Madison complies with his party's beliefs of strict constructionism. During Madison's presidency, he was forced to fill the ranks of the regular army by compulsion, which was drafting men from the militia into the army without a formal right from Congress. In a speech written Daniel Webster, he renounced Madison's policies since there was nothing specifically stated in the Constitution that he could use to justify his actions. Although Madison relied on his party's views of strict interpretation in regards to domestic affairs, he realized that their views in regards to foreign policy and war
(Document 8) George Washington stated that the people should have a say in the nation and government and everything should not be left to the government to decide. (Document 3) Although George Washington was a Federalist many believed he showed a point of view that seemed to be Anti-Federalists. Many believed that The Bill of Rights needed to be changed and modified and a new document’s time to come into place. As it was definitely difficult to do so, the Constitution was ratified in
The Fourteenth Amendment has become one of the most heavily litigated sections of the Constitution. It has been used to protect virtually all of the rights granted in the Bill of Rights. Certain clauses have their own meaning, such as the Due Process clause, which enabled states to make their own laws and the Equal Protection clause which orders all individuals to be treated as equals. The Fourteenth Amendment has many meanings, yet it has other, overlooked powers that can be put into use
He explained that slavery could only exist if the local legislature passed regulations protecting slave property and could lawfully avoid slavery without actually banning it. Douglas won the Illinois senate seat with his answer that later became known as the Freeport Doctrine. The only drawback was that his answer further alienated the South which led to him being stripped of power in the Senate and also contributed to the division of the Democratic
In theory, the three branches of government are there to provide each other checks and balances. During Lincoln’s time, he had created the Emancipation Proclamation as the president. There were many rumors of the judicial system ordering slavery to be allowed, providing a check for President Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation. It was pretty sure that congress would pass the bill due to the corruption that was mentioned before, but in order to make sure that the country did not go back to how it was before, the President had to be sure this bill was tied to peace agreements. In order for this bill to have come about and be passed, even if the branches did not agree, they had to work together Now a days, we see that sometimes it is hard for the three branches to agree.
In the coming years, severe economic difficulties, foreign problems, state sovereignty, limited central government and rebellions urge the United States to construct a new government. Important figures such as Alexander Hamilton himself, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, James Madison and many others worked towards forming and instituting a new and more sustainable system of government. Ultimately the Constitution was created-- which divided the United States government into three equal branches that worked in an equal system of checks and balances. Considering the failure of the A.O.C it was in part the foundation the Constitution-- it gave the Founding Fathers a clear guideline for what not to do. The Constitution provided the legitimacy and power the federal government desperately needed while also allowing the citizens of the United States to have a significant role in how they are
Both parties had America’s best interest at heart, however Hamilton and the Federalists’ ideas concerning the economy, interpretation of the Constitution, and the future of American society made them more fit for governing the United States. Hamilton’s understanding of a successful economy allowed him to make decisions that would benefit the country. As discussed in source one, Alexander Hamilton created a uniform currency and an economic plan that would assume state debts and make them federal debts. From there on, he created a national bank; in source three Hamilton states, “...[The Democratic Republicans] were determined to oppose the banking system, which would ruin the credit and honor of the Nation”, as he clearly has the nation’s best interest at heart. The Democratic Republican feared corruption, but they overlooked that their rights are protected in the Constitution and that their
This jeopardized free blacks. If a white man were to accuse a black of anything, the black man isn’t able to appeal to a jury and must appeal to a judge at a time when most judges were white and racist towards blacks. Popular Sovereignty was also questioned during this case. Popular Sovereignty was popular with politicians because it allowed the state to decide if it wanted to become a free state. Dred Scott was in a free state and was still put down by the supreme
The purpose to call the Constitutional Convention, at first, was to revise the Articles of Confederation. However, the framers later decided to create an entirely new government. This was introduced to the nation though the Preamble. The Preamble showed how the government takes authority from the people rather than the states. The Preamble also highlights a major difference between the Constitution and the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution having a more stronger central government.
“Federalism is a system of government in which entities such as states or provinces share power with a national government. The United States government functions according to the principles of federalism.” Implied powers doctrine came out by the State of Maryland to block the operations of federally supported Second Bank of the United States. The state Legislature placed a tax on notes held by all banks originally built outside of the state. It didn’t speak of the Second Bank, the Supreme Court discovered that it could establish that this was the reason of the law, given that no other out of state banks existed in Maryland. The Supreme Court said no to the actions of the state by finding that the Federal Government held implied powers under the Constitution, it exercised by creating federal banks.
A lot of states didn’t like this because there was nothing in the Constitution that says Congress can do this. So the state of Maryland decided to try and get rid of it, by taxing it. So the question was can a state tax a federal bank and can Congress create a national bank that states have to live with? Chief Justice John Marshall found the Necessary and Proper Clause gave Congress the flexibility to create the bank as an aid to carrying out its enumerated borrowing and taxing powers and that Maryland’s taxation of the bank violated the Supremacy Clause. Another example of Congress’ power to make laws was the U. S. vs. Comstock case which gave a wide understanding of the Necessary and Proper Clause.
Prior to the national adoption of the Constitution, the issues that lied with the American approach to the Barbary Pirates mainly lied with the Articles of Confederation. These governing documents prevented the United States from creating a standing navy, which was considered, by some, to be a threat to liberty. Beyond that, with the nation’s inability to trade in the Mediterranean region, it was a difficult to even secure enough funds to be able to produce a naval force capable of protecting commercial vessels. However, once the Constitution was instituted and the country was able to begin production of federal warships, the problem of the war changed to whether or not the conflict was constitutional. Frank Lambert notes, “Aware that he was not engaging the enemy under a congressional declaration of war, Lieutenant Andrew Sterett...released the surviving pirates and their ship after the battle.
The original system of dual federalism was set up so that the states and national government were separate but worked together. The states did most of the governing instead of the national government. “Citizens daily lives were chiefly affected by their states government not the national.” (Champagne and Harpham, 86) The national government role was to provide for national defence and foreign policy and assist in the development of commerce. The original statement of dual federalism can be found in The Collector v. Day (1807). A Supreme Court case that challenged the authority of the federal government to tax income of a state judge.
Taxation and Spending Clause The issue is whether the proposed legislation is permissible under the Taxation and Spending Clause as these objectives cannot be accomplished under the Commerce Clause. Congress’s ability to “lay and collect” taxes originates from Article §8 (1) of the Constitution. It further states that Congress “shall have the power to...pay the debts and provide for common defense and general of United States.” Congress once had broad authority when applying this clause to issues that concerned the nation’s general welfare. In US v. Butler (1936), the Court stated though Congress has expansive power to use “public monies for public purposes,” but there are limitations. It is within Congress’s right to impose a condition on