Should No State Shall Enter Into Any Treaty, Alliance, Or Confederation?

Last year, our new government was formed. We agreed to what the Articles had said. It seems that now we are having issues with what we had once agreed with. In this newsletter, I will only address four of the most problematic things in the Articles of Confederation. However there are many more that will not be brought to light today.

The president, who is the head of the executive branch, is elected by the entire nation and serves four years. According to article II of the Constitution the president has the power of execution and enforcement of laws passed by the congress, choose cabinet members and officials, he is the head of state and the commander and chief of the armed forces. The vice president is also a part of the executive branch and is a position to take presidency in case something happened to the president. In contrast, the judicial branch officials are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. In article three of the constitution the judicial branch is established and to let the congress to determine the judicial structure, the jurisdiction of the federal courts and the number of Supreme Court Justices.

* State law prohibiting political entities from annexing land without the consent of its residents.

According to Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, this was the original structure of the Electoral College. Each state was given a certain number of electors based on the number of state senators, which was always 2, as well as the number of U.S. representatives, which varied by decades based on the states population.

The Act of State Doctrine: states that the judicial branch of one country will not examine the validity of public acts committed by a recognize foreign government within the latter’s own territory.

After all a war had just ended and the new country was in debt. This article also established the idea of National Supremacy, where the Constitution, Federal Law, Supreme Court decisions, and any treaties entered into by the Government would be the supreme law of the land and that no state law could contradict it. The supremacy clause has been a factor even recently in the Supreme Court decision that same sex marriage was legal in all states regardless of what the state’s constitution said. The last part of Article Six was the oath of office, where all politician whether in the federal or state governments would be required to take an oath to uphold the Constitution before taking

11. Which clause states that the Constitution, and federal statutes and treaties, shall be the supreme law of the land.

This article, "The Necessary and Proper Clause" also known as "The Elastic Clause," gives Congress the power to broaden its powers and keep Federal balance. Supreme Court Justice Marshall presents an argument that supports Congress' regulation over all commerce. He clearly says, "It is the power to regulate; that is, to prescribe the rule by which commerce is to be governed. This power, like all others vested in Congress, is complete in itself, may be exercised to its utmost extent, and acknowledges no limitations other than are prescribed in the Constitution." Where the Constitution states, "Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the several States, and with the Indian tribes," the word "among" means intermixed with. Commerce may concern more than one state, therefore Congress needs to act "within the territorial jurisdiction of the several states" The Supreme Court held that the power of Congress includes navigation within its limits in every State. Any state activity that attempts to regulate interstate commerce is completely unconstitutional because in dealing with interstate commerce, it can be inferred from the Constitution that the Federal government must regulate interstate commerce. The Constitution did not provide states with the power to regulate commerce between states so it is imperative that the federal government intercedes. Although the only

a. Supremacy Law- “ The constitution and the laws of the United States which shall be made in the pursuance thereof... shall be the supreme law of the land.”

The arguments made by Federalists and anti-Federalists regarding the office and powers of the presidency during the ratifying debates that followed the drafting of the Constitution in 1787 were persuasive, but distinctly at odds. Both sides, however, sought the same thing, how best to allocate power in a unified republic of states? From this question opposing views developed as to whether or not a President should even exist, and if so, what powers he should be granted. I will briefly examine the presidential powers that were primarily awarded under Article II of the new Constitution. I will then explore the opposing arguments that arose during the ratifying debates concerning those granted powers. I do so in the interest of offering a

The Louisiana Purchase is another course of action taken by Jefferson known for contradicting his strict constitutionalist views. Neglecting the fact that there is no clause in the

3b. Which amendment states that the powers not specifically delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states?

Confederacies exist as a group of autonomous individual states, regions, or member components who form a national body, or centralized government, to represent their independent interests at a more regional and international level. The existence of the national government is derived from the consent of each governed autonomous state or region. The entities that submit to this central ruling authority are able to withdraw from the compact that binds them together. The national authority created is only bestowed with the powers, authority, and privileges which the independent components in the confederacy allow. If any member component feels its interests are no longer being served or the compact has interfered with its autonomy, then that entity of the confederacy can sever its ties with the national body. This can occur because the state, region, or member component has the supreme ultimate authority over its own affairs. As further examination and analysis will demonstrate there is no inherent authority invested into the national government as is the case of a federalist system.

This paper examines the historical extension of the federal government's power through the application of the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article 1, Section 8). Also, the paper will give the reader a better understanding of the original need for the Commerce Clause, the early interoperation, and the current extended interpretation, which include its impact on the states and citizens. The paper will also give examples of how the Commerce Clause was defined by using Supreme Court Cases.

The constitutional states that the commerce clause gives the congress power “to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, with the Indian tribes”(US Constitution