Interpreting the Constitution

The Beacon Learning gives a breakdown of the Preamble, starting with; We the people of the Unites States meaning all citizens of the United States (The Meaning of the United States Preamble). Following are the goals or reasons that will summarize the Constitution. To form a more perfect union, establish justice and insure domestic tranquility. These three goals mean. To make everything in our country as perfect as possible, begin fairness for all and promise that everything in our country will be peaceful (The Meaning of the United States Preamble). Last set of goals, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity and do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. Meaning, give protection to everyone, care for those

The American Civil War has caused many debates amongst a wide range of historians resulting in many different views being formed on all aspects of the War. The argument whether slavery has been overemphasised is one of great debate. Some historians like Michael F. Holt concur that the slavery issue was nearly the only reason and cause of the American civil war. Others disagree, Joel H. Silbey agrees that this is a reason but not the only one other ideas to need to be looked at to the cause of the outbreak of war in America. I will look at this issue and others which caused the beginning of the civil war.

In the Unites States of America Federalism is the basic structure of the American government; it is the distribution and balance of powers between the National government and the States government. In order to obtain a compromise between those who wanted stronger state government and those who preferred a stronger national government the founding fathers arranged and settled for a federal system rather than the alternatives of a unitary or confederal system. While both National and State governments each have specific powers and authority, they also share certain powers and must be able to cooperate effectively with each other.

Federalism was the first guard against tyranny. The central government and states both had their own powers but also shared a few. They had trading, conducting foreign relations, declaring war, making immigration laws etc. Local state governments got elections, establishing schools, passing marriage and divorce laws, and regulating in-state business. “The different governments will control each other and at the same time it will be controlled by itself,” said James Madison in the federalist paper #51.

Directions: The following question requires you to construct a coherent essay that integrates your interpretation of Documents A-I and your knowledge of the period referred to in the question. High scores will be earned only by essays that both cite key pieces of evidence from the documents and draw on outside knowledge of the period. Some of the documents have been edited, and wording and punctuation have been modernized.

9. Discuss the impact of the Emancipation Proclamation, both during and after the Civil War. Discuss reasons why Lincoln issued it when he did, and what was the impact on African Americans?

There were many problems, events, and situations that led to the Civil War. One of the major reasons for the outbreak of the war was sectionalism. Once the United States was split, many of the country's fundamental issues were disputed, with slavery being at the top of the list. Some of the other major issues in dispute were representation, tariffs, and states' rights. Sectionalism is defined as, the sharp socio-economic differences that divided the Northern and the Southern states in the U.S.

The author of “The fate of their Country: Politicians, Slavery Extensions, and the coming of Civil War”, Michael F. Holt has several very good points about the reasons why the Civil War happened. Now I am going to explain why he thinks that slavery is the main issue of the conflict between the North and South. Why did Texas have such a pivotal role in the struggle between states? Why was the Wilmot Proviso politically dangerous? What occurred in Kansas and why did things go do wrong? And what is the importance of the Dred Scott decision?

-Amendment number ten states that the powers not specifically delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states.

     When the Federalist party was organized in 1791, those people who favored a strong central government and a loose constitutional interpretation coagulated and followed the ideals of men such as Alexander Hamilton. The first opposition political party in the United States was the Republican party, which held power, nationally, between 1801 and 1825. Those who were in favor of states rights and a strict construction of the constitution fell under the leadership of Thomas Jefferson. These Jeffersonian republicans, also known as anti-federalists, believed in strict adherence to the writings of the constitution. They wanted state’s rights and individual rights, which they believed could only be granted under

In 1860, the world 's greatest nation was locked in Civil War. The war divided the country between the North and South. There were many factors that caused this war, but the main ones were the different interpretations of the Constitution by the North and South, the Kansas-Nebraska Act, and the arrival of

According to Antonin Scalia there are two types of approaches to interpreting the Constitution: originalist and living. Which approach do you believe the Court should take? Why? How does this approach affect the policymaking process?

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.

Sectional conflict between the North and South was the very platform of the birth of the Civil War. Slavery was a prominent dispute that played a large role in the differences throughout the U.S. at this time, but there were other causes as well including economic and social differences and the election of Abraham Lincoln. In the midst of various events in the 1850s, it was the southern secession that began the true separation of the Union and the Confederacy, which showed the reality and quickness of the arrival of the Civil War in the United States.

Traditional Originalism led the court as the method of constitutional interpretation until the late nineteenth century. Judges were compelled to interpret the Constitution based on the original meaning of the provisions. The Originalism view interprets the constitution line by line exactly as the founders would have found it. Later, during the early twentieth century, progressives in the legal community proclaimed that due to the changing social environment as time goes on in the nation, the political system needed to be reconfigured. They thought that the political system needed increased national government authority and a modern administrative state. They also thought that the increased national authority and modern administrative state wouldn’t work well with the traditional Originalism interpretation of the constitution. After long political battles in and out of the court, they won the argument and the Constitution would be adapted without formally amending it. Debates were waged over whether or not the Constitution could be changed through interpretation instead of the originalist requirement of amendment, and over whether or not the Constitution was to be viewed as living. The notion of a “living constitution” was developed, and slowly set precedent as landmark cases made their way through the supreme court, and the interpretation of the constitution was put to the test.