Why Was The Constitution A Controversial Document Even As It Was Being Written?
Name:
Institution:
Date of submission:
Why Was The Constitution A Controversial Document Even As It Was Being Written?
Introduction
The United States Constitution was written more than 200 years ago and it has been used as the foundation for the government. The constitution has been and still remains the most durable political agreement in the history of the world. Even though an inspiring document, its creation was not that easy but controversial. Its framers were divided over a number of major issues which led to lengthy arguments when it was being written. After its creation the Constitution still remains controversial. It
…show more content…
The issue of a two party system was another issue that sparked controversy as the American constitution was being drafted. The delegates failed to accept that it was a two party system. This continued to create a growing rift among the advocates. It led to the separation between advocates for a large and stronger versus those for a small and a weak federal government.
Slavery was another controversial issue in the drafting of the constitution. It was not about its abolition, but rather division on to which state the slaves would be counted to in working out a state’s population as well as the amount of property tax to be implemented over the owners3. The government decided to it would not interfere with the slave trade for no less than 20 years, but this move received opposition from the southern.
Eventually, another controversy of the constitution was the issue of the citizenship. The written constitution did not clarify what composed citizenship. It did not also deliver the particular rights for a United States citizen4. These issues led to the controversy in the Bill of Rights. The Bill of rights still remains controversial due to the changing times.
Conclusion
As the constitution was being written ideas were divided between the advocates. The advocates understood that that the constitution was an idea of the republican thinking, providing for a new level to the people’s elected
On September 17, 1787 framers in Philadelphia signed “The Constitution of the United States in which it was approved on June 21, 1788 by the ninth state. Once confirmed, along with the addition to the Bill of Rights it developed a mutual standard by which Americans determined the responsibilities and limits of their government. Looking to the Constitution to decide political discrepancies has helped to substitute and preserve a general agreement among people that are otherwise diverse. The Constitution, although two centuries of complications and trials of the American experiment in self-government, is a testament to the cleverness and anticipation of its framers.
A constitution is a written document that sets forth the fundamental rules by which a society is governed. Throughout the course of history the United States has lived under two Constitutions since the British-American colonies declared their independence from Great Britain in 1776. First in line was the Articles of Confederation (1789-1789) followed by the Constitution of United States of America (1789-present). The Articles of Confederation was the first formal written Constitution of America that specified how the national government was to operate. Unfortunately, the Articles did not last long. Under the words of the Article’s power was limited; Congress could make decisions, but had no power to enforce them. Also the articles stated
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).
The main purpose behind the book Unruly 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.
The constitution of the United States of America is the founding document on which the government of America is built. It currently has twenty-seven amendments. It lines out the specific government practices as well as the system of check and balances. It was first drafted July, 1787 after the first form of government, the articles of confederation, had proven very inefficient to a point where it became almost redundant to have them in place. After a large amount of debate the acting continental congress decide to completely revise the current system. The constitution was efficient and fair and it kept the parts of government in place while not giving too much power to one or more branches.
The Constitution changed the United States as a whole country. Not only was it a powerful, extremely important document created to represent the United State’s Government in 1788, but it is able to still apply to today’s society. There were two different ruling political groups when the document was created, the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. These two parties had extremely different views on how the country should be run and by who.
The United States Constitution was ratified and made law September 17, 1789. For Americas yet-to-be history the Framers knew the Constitution had to have a way to grow and change with the people, and their needs. This paper will cover the amendment process, the need for the Bill of Rights, how the Bill of Rights has affected America, what the Bill of Rights have granted American’s, discuss the later amendments, and what effect the later amendments have had.
Summary: Some of the issues were the people that denied to agree or support the constitution. Some states did not favor the way the government limited the power for the federal government because they were scared it would overrule state laws and disliked how citizens were able to control as well. Analysis: There were issues because several of states took quite a while to ratify the constitution. The constitution needed at least 9 out of 13 colonies to ratify, however the states did not support the new system. It took 10 months for 9 colonies to ratify. Although, it took almost an year the constitution was
In modern America, many citizens hold to the notion that the Constitution was adopted unanimously, without debate or disagreement. Not only is this not the case, the debate and disagreement that took place during the institution of the governing articles for the newly formed country are ultimately responsible for the system we have in place today as the concerns and counterpoints raised in the discussion were more crucial to the successful continuance of stability in the nation than any unanimous decision. Given the apparent import of such discussion, it is therefore prudent to examine the original points of contention to determine their merit and to further ensure that the concerns originally raised have been addressed sufficiently.
Despite the fact the founding fathers advised contrary to the establishment of political factions as the Constitution withstood the ratification process, a rift amongst men in President George Washington’s cabinet instituted the move toward the conception of political party. During the time period between 1791 and 1833, a two-party system had begun that demonstrated the philosophy of the Federalists and Democratic-Republicans. Although these two political groups were unyielding in their original ideas and beliefs, both had to change a few of their initial standpoints on numerous topics as they dealt with the truth of the government.
The U.S. Constitution was the first constitution in the world, and for its time, it was an outstanding document. For this reason, the subsequent constitutions could not ignore the experience of the drafters of the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Constitution (including the Bill of Rights) had great influence on modern policy documents: the Declaration of Human and Civil Rights of 1789 and the Polish Constitution of 1791.
Currie, D. (1992), the Constitution in the Supreme Court: The First Hundred Years, 1789-1988, Pges152-155 (Univ. of Chicago).
According to Scott (2008), the Constitution of America has undergone several translations within the history of America because they found it to be unclear. Whereas it appears discrepant that the unclear Constitution could be useful, the disagreement is the case (Robertson, 2005). Americans regard the Constitution to be helpful for the reason that it allows for diverseness of views. In the history of America, a variety of thoughts would develop with alarming and formidable support through various factions (Robertson, 2005). Today, the main political arguments are presented from the Republican group or Democratic group. During the early periods of the American government, arguments on politics were made by Thomas Jefferson
The book, “A Brilliant Solution” analyses the American constitution from scratch to the end with a clear review of the start of the process, the debates
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.