Constitutional Interpretation of Checks and Balances Essay

The Articles of Confederation Following the Revolutionary War, the new American Government was set up under the Articles of Confederation. The Articles of Confederation did not give the federal government enough authority to be effective. So in 1787 delegates from all the states attended a meeting known as the Constitutional Convention. Among those attending were James Madison, representing Virginia, William Paterson, representing New Jersey, and Roger Sherman, representing Connecticut.

However, an uprising led by Revolutionary War captain Daniel Shays that took place in western Massachusetts in 1786 was the event that got the attention of the founding fathers. The Shay’s Rebellion demonstrated to the founding fathers that the Articles of Confederation brought commercial problems, threaten civil order, and conflicts between states. Likewise, at the constitutional convention the founding fathers crafted and ratified the U.S constitution to address the problem the Articles of Confederation could not tackle. Unlike the Articles of Confederation, the divided the powers of the national government into three branches: executive, legislative, and judicial. Furthermore, the constitution established a one true currency system and presented the job duties and requirements the three branches and individual states. Unlike the Articles of Confederation, the constitution presented the rights of its people (Bill of Rights) and a system of check of balance and separation of powers that the United States as democratic country. The Articles of Confederation was a popular democracy with its chaotic results and the constitution was a responsible democracy with its civilized outcomes.

The Constitution of the United States was written in 1787 at the Constitutional Convention, where it was held in Philadelphia. It was written by a group of people known as “Farmers,” or the “Founding Fathers,” and few of the most famous Founding Fathers were George Washington (The first president of the USA), Thomas Jefferson (The first vice president and the third president of the USA) James Madison (The fourth president of the USA), Samuel Adams, and Benjamin Franklin. The old government, the Articles of Confederation was not working as it supposed to be, it was vulnerable and cannot secure and defend the new born nation and for that reason the constitution of the united states saw the light.

The Founding fathers did not want to create a government with too much power so they created the Articles of Confederation. This government turned out to be a failure. In 1787, the founding fathers met again to create a new framework of government. Most people feared creating a government that was too strong. To create a new government there had to be many compromises, the U.S. Constitution is the result of these compromises reached in Philadelphia in 1787. The Articles of Confederation were too weak and created many problems which led to a stronger National government. Two weaknesses of the Articles of confederation were that Congress did not have the power to tax. Another problem was that the states had most of the power and the National Government had little power. Two decisions made by the

The doctrine of separation of powers developed over many centuries. This practice doctrine can be traced to the British Parliament's gradual assertion of power and resistance to royal decrees during the 14th century. Political theorist, John Locke wrote about the concept of separation of powers in his Second Treatise of Government (1690). In the United States, the separation of powers is a fundamental constitutional principle. The framers of this Constitution saw the need to divide power within the government to prevent a single group from ruthlessly taking over the country. Articles I through III of the Constitution of the United States place each of the basic powers of government in a separate branch. This

Did you know the framers of the constitution belt a checks and balance system into the government? There are three branches the executive, legislative and judicial the checks and balance were put in place to ensure that no one branch would be more powerful than the others. These checks and balances include the presidential Veto, the ability of congress to Impeachment and, judicial review.

When the framers of our revered Constitution came together to produce our governing system, they wanted to avoid the precedent of an all powerful entity that could control its citizens. They broke governments role into three important phases, which were the power to make laws, the power to interpret laws, and the ability to enforce them. To further decentralize these authority holding organizations, they created a system that allowed each of the three sections to have a say in each of the others ability to exercise said authority. This organization of overlapping power is referred to as a checks and balances system and was intended to create three equal powers to govern the United States. Over the years since its

The Constitution has been operative since 1789 after the ratification of nine states (American Vision and Values, Page 52). Today many question the relevancy of a document 222 years old to our society. The Founders created a governmental framework, defining three branches and giving powers to the government and others to the states. It also guarantees the rights of the people. It took two and one-half years for the 13 colonies to ratify the Constitution. This ratification period was one of great debate and produced a series of essays complied into The Federalist. Authored by John Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay during the ratification debate in New York, they tried to get public support for the Constitution. Thus began the first

The Articles of Confederation and the Constitution are two very important guidelines of government that shaped the political minds of the Americans. Mainly because these guidelines limited, or expanded the powers of the executive, legislative, and judicial branch. The Articles of Confederation were a series of laws that gave more power to the state government than the federal government. As a result, the federal government could not enforce laws or levy taxes. After Shay’s Rebellion, the Founding Fathers realized that a change was necessary. So the Constitution was created. The most important change of the Constitution was that the majority of power was then shifted into the hands of the federal or central government. This allowed the federal

The Constitutional Convention of 1787 marked the evolution from the Articles of Confederation to the U.S. Constitution. The ratification argument led to disagreements between the Federalists, who wanted to approve the Constitution, and Anti-Federalists, who opposed the document. The latter believed that the new system forced by the Constitution failed to protect the individual rights of citizens and threatened liberties.

Following the United States’ independence from Great Britain, the Articles of Confederation were formed in order to hold the country together politically. The Articles proved inefficient, as Congress couldn’t collect taxes or regulate interstate commerce, the government couldn’t raise an army, there was no national currency and most importantly, there was no central government. But the spark that triggered Americans’ realization that they needed to call a constitutional convention happened after an event in Massachusetts in 1786, called Shays’ Rebellion.

In May 1787, the Founding Fathers, who were made up of 55 delegates from one of the 13 states besides Rhode Island, met in Philadelphia for what would come to be called the Constitutional Convention [BRE]. When they met they intended to fix the consitution that was already in place, which was called the Articles of Confederation. This document had many weaknesses which ultimatly led to its downfall: it only had a legislative branch, so it could not hold trials or enforce laws, it could not raise taxes (it was able to raise money, however to do this the legislative branch had to ask the states for funds), it could not draft an army, so the federal government would have to use state militia, it could not control interstate or foreign commmerce,

The Articles of Confederation became the first guiding principles of the original thirteen states. However, the weaknesses embedded in the articles became obvious, outweighing its positive impact and they were ratified in 1781. George Washington sated that the articles were "little more than a shadow without the substance."1 They limited the central government’s ability to work smoothly and adversely affected the economy. Lack of power left the government in dismay and they sought a fix to their problems without becoming a tyrannical monarchy. The founding fathers believed that replacing the articles with The Constitution was the best way to give the central government enough power to carry out its tasks. In 1787 delegates from all 13 states met in Pennsylvania to begin amending the articles. This process revealed many of the similarities and differences that were contained within The Articles of Confederation and The Constitution.

“The Constitution devotes the national domain to union, to justice, to defense, to welfare and to liberty” (Maier 154). This quote, stated by William Henry Seward, displays the strength and stability that the Constitution had over the nation, and the liberty and justice it supplied for all of its citizens. Although the Constitution and the Articles of Confederation have similarities, they have many differences, which proved that the Articles of Confederation were a weaker document in comparison. It can be said that the Articles were the “rough draft” to the final living document, which significantly influenced and “ruled” our government, as it still does today.

In this essay I will try to explain and critique the two dominant methods of constitutional interpretation. Which are originalism and non-originalism. I will do this by taking help from “How to Read the Constitution” by Christopher Wolfe, and different source’s from Internet. I will start by giving what Wolfe says originalism is, and then I will give some background to other ways to interpret the constitution, and the founders and interpretation and I will finish up with my view on originalism and non-originalism and the critics to that.