How The U.s. Constitution Has Evolved Over Time Essay

This book emphasizes the alternative interpretations offered by Americans on the origins of the Constitution. Holton’s purpose with this book was to show that the framers interests involved making America more attractive to investors. In order to do so, they purposefully made the government less democratic with the writing of the Constitution. However, with the addition of the Bill of Rights, one could argue the Framers had at least a slight concern for the American people and their civil liberties.

Many elements of the constitution remain unchanged. Due to the nature of the US constitution being codified, it has required a two thirds majority in Congress to change anything and this has meant that it hasn’t been greatly changed since the time it was made. The Bill of rights had remained pretty much the same since its creation. The right to bear arms, for example, is still a part of the conversation and despite many people wishing to amend it, this has not been able to happen. This proves the ridgity that the Founding Fathers wanted to give the Constitution.

Using information from the evidence below as well as your knowledge of the period, discuss the development of the United States Constitution as a document which ensured popular sovereignty.

David O. Stewart, by profession, is a lawyer with a resume that includes everything from arguing appeals at the Supreme Court level to serving as a law court to the acclaimed Junior Powell. But in writing The Summer of 1787: The Men Who Invented the Constitution (specifically, I read the First Simon & Schuster trade paperback edition May 2008, copyrighted in 2007), he uses that experience in law to prove himself a gifted storyteller. Two hundred sixty-four pages long, this United States history nonfiction book does indeed have the substance to engage the reader throughout. It has special features that include two appendices featuring the elector system and the actual constitution of 1787, author’s notes, suggested further reading, acknowledgments and an index (which escalate the total length of the book to three hundred forty-nine pages long).

​In his book ‘Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America,’ Wrinkler tried to present an unbiased view towards the second amendment in the light of historical events and landmark cases that has tried to challenge or obtain the court’s interpretation. One of such cases is the ‘District of Columbia v. Heller’ case, which was argued and decided in 2008 (Supreme Court of the United States). For several instances, the provision in the Second Amendment that pertains to the right of an individual to bear arms has been contested. In fact, the clause, which states that “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”, is perhaps the most misconstrued clause in the American constitution (Supreme Court of the United States). Adding to the significance of this highly debatable clause is the fact that a flurry of gun related incidences has happened in the United States in the past that has taken many lives including that of children. Among the most significant authors that has attempted to answer the question or at least laid out the possibilities regarding the second amendment is Adam Wrinkler. In light of Winkler’s arguments as well as with other sources, this paper will examine the historical

“The United States Constitution is the oldest written national constitution still in use” (Confederation and the Constitution, pg. 71). After more than 200 years, the Constitution is still changing to support the next generations needs. This “living document” has many different reasons that allow it to “fit in” with the new generations.

The first speaker, Dr. Khal Schneider, addresses the words behind the 2nd amendment. He provides us with a historical background around the formation of the amendment and further describes the works that are within this amendment. He highlights words such as “Militia”, “necessary”, “arms”, and “infringed”. He describes how these words can be interpreted differently, thus making it hard to actually interpret the amendment for what it actually means. For instance, he draws attention to the word “arms” and describes the evolution. He illustrates that his amendment must be looked at in respects to the century it was written in. He then describes the difference between “arms’ within both centuries. He draws attention to the increase

28. To what extent was the United States Constitution a radical departure from the Articles of Confederation? (2005B)

Contrary to, surprisingly, popular belief that the United States Constitution is outdated, it is, in fact, still relevant in today’s society on the basis of The Bill of Rights, checks and balances, and the Elastic Clause in the

The history of mankind reflects that without the clear rights of people being written down to reference back to, destruction would incur (An Old Whig V, 1787). An Old Whig V additionally added, for example, if the nation were to come across future leaders who allow the replacement of officers just so they could side with them there is not a statement refusing the government otherwise (An Old Whig V, 1787). Without the inclusion of a Bill of Rights to clarify the boundaries of which government must not cross then oppression would be the road we are calling unto our future (An Old Whig, 1787).It is essential for future generations to express their “liberty of conscience, freedom of speech and writing and publishing their thoughts on public matters, a trial by jury, holding themselves, their houses and papers free from seizures and search upon general suspicion or general warrants” through the security of ratifying the Bill of Rights (An Old Whig V,

Very recently in June 2016, Orlando suffered a tragedy, when a man with an assault rifle walked into a nightclub and shot almost fifty people dead, the deadliest gun violence assault in American history. This is only one example of the horrifying assaults committed so far in the 21st century. The recent violence has unsurprisingly warranted discussion about repealing the amendment, or at least altering it. Yet, politicians are tentative on the issue, many believing that the Constitution should never be modified. The National Rifle Association and many politicians have remained obstinate on the issue, refusing to change its stance to “protect” the Second Amendment.

John Paul Stevens’ book, Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution, advocates the concept of self-governance which, in his perspective, has been poorly compromised by recent Supreme Court rulings. At the age of ninety-four, Stevens criticizes these modern court opinions and advises that we push for amendments to overturn these misguided court decisions. The six subjects of controversy that Stevens has proposed remedies for are the anti commandeering rule, political gerrymandering, campaign finances, sovereign immunity, death penalty, and gun control. These claims are supported with both historical evidence as well as his own personal perspective on court rulings that he has participated in during his 35 years as a

Under the precepts of the Founding Fathers of this country, we are ruled by this fluid document formally known as the Constitution. One that advances, changes after some time, and acclimates to fit the present state of affairs, without being authoritatively amended. It can be revised; however, the change procedure is exceptionally troublesome. The most imperative changes were added to the Constitution right around a century and a half back, in the wake of the Civil War, and since that time a large portion of the revisions have managed generally minor matters.

Gun control is one of the most debated about topic today in America; between news outlet, the public, and politicians. As some politicians look to resolve the gun control issues, with banning them, imposing more restriction to sellers, buyers and owner; some people and politicians consider the second amendment to be relic and should be removed from the constitution. History has shown us time and time again even through all the violence and chaos in the world and America, that there is a reason for the creation of the second amendment. From history of America independence in 1776 to the ratification of the bill of right in 1791 the 2nd amendment still remains relevant form it creation, to modern times, and the protection of America’s future; for the freedom of its inhabitants and citizens. The once influential 20th century thinker George Santayana once said, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”. Looking back into ancient history, the history of second amendment, recent and current history we can find clues that will support the relevance of the 2nd amendment. We will also define the second amendment and try to find solutions to our current problems from what our forefathers had say.

Throughout the years, gun violence is increasing dramatically. Mass Shootings are becoming more frequent, suicides are now mostly caused by a gun to the head, and crimes are being involved with guns. Somehow minors and criminals are gaining firearms. The government isn’t telling us the real story. They claim that they have very strict laws, well it turns out they don’t. There are so many things that the government hides from the public’s eye. Criminals get their way (hiding from the government) and they gain access to guns of their choosing. From pistols to machine guns, to rocket launchers. In this essay, I will explain to you how criminals are getting their way, causing so much gun violence across the United States, and how the government is doing nothing about this.