Intent of the Framers

The Framers Intent Paper HIS/311 January 1, 2013 Introduction The first 10 amendments of the United States Constitution are the Bill of Rights. They were written to protect the rights of American People. The amendments represent important ideas that affect everyone on a daily basis. The first amendment involves freedom of religion, speech, assembly, and the press. The original intent of for freedom of speech, along with current views, events, opinions, an evaluation of the affects

Firstly, The framers wrote the Constitution with the original intent that the philosophy of interpreting it would be strict. They wanted to clearly state exactly how the government will be set up and how the powers of it will be evenly distributed. If the framers were going to make a document that completes so many great objectives and perfects the flaws of the Articles of Confederation, why would they want the people who read the Constitution to interpret it loosely? Such a philosophy would defeat

A significant strength of the Constitution is that if it is followed, its language clearly guides disputes and helps settle any debate over issues of religion and politics. The framers intended it to do so and made its language simple and clear. The question is why American citizens insist upon disregarding the Constitution’s language. A simple answer is that by doing so, various groups who attempt to twist the Constitution are attempting to do exactly what the document intends to prevent—the

Constitutional interpretation: originalism and activism. While the intent of the Framers should certainly not be ignored in reading and applying the Constitution’s words, it is important to view the document with a certain degree of modernity. The originalist approach towards

support of the Supreme Court Justices having term limits imposed on them to honor the Framers’ original intent when they wrote the Constitution in 1787. One reason for imposing term limits is that the average life expectancy of an American has more than doubled from when the Constitution was first written. Article III of the Constitution provides that federal judges “shall hold their offices during

Americans and the Origins of the Constitution, by Woody Holton is to demonstrate the authors view on the true intent of the Framers when writing the Constitution. Although at first glance the book may seem to uphold the idea that the framers wrote the Constitution in order to protect civil liberties, Holton has a different opinion. To avoid a one sided book, the author not only looks at the framers intent, but the struggles facing the American people. This book emphasizes the alternative interpretations

easy undertaking understanding the original intent the framers of the Constitution. In his work David Forte explains that there are many problems with the “availability of evidence; the reliability of the data; the relative weight of authority to be given to different events, personalities, and organizations of the era; the relevance of subsequent history; and the conceptual apparatus needed to interpret the data” (Forte, 2014). With original intent being the interpretation of the United States

ultimate guide of principles for law creation and enforcement. With that being said, the words of the Constitution are unclear in many respects. Politicians have debates over the Constitution due to the reason that it is difficult to figure out what the Framers meant when they originally wrote the Constitution. According to the Constitution, the Supreme Court has the authority to decide if a law passed by Congress is Constitutional. However, the vagueness of the Constitution allows for the Supreme Court

US Constitution should not be interpreted to be compatible with the concrete expectations of those long before our time. In particular areas, the understanding of existing constitutional law goes out farther than the original understandings of the framers of the Constitution. In many instances, Scalia’s originalism would fail to fit current practices in society. In regards to the interpretation of the US Constitution, Scalia’s originalism is argued to be different from other varieties of originalism

of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” When the Framers of the Constitution wrote the 1st amendment there intention was exactly was to prevent the government from interfering with States’ rights. More specifically, the Framers intent was to allow citizens to speak freely without violating the law or public policy. However, the Framers did not intend the 1st amendment to be a gateway for citizens to say whatever they want, individuals can still