What Is Limiting The Power Of The Federal Government

The Bill of Rights limits the power of the federal government. How does it do this? How about an example? Can the federal government establish a federal religion that all must follow and have faith in? Most definitely not, the first amendment prohibits this from happening. The first amendment says, in part,

    I believe that the U.S constitution should be applied in a more expansive sense. A lot of our country has changed since 1789 when the constitution was first written. The way of life is different, the way we prosecute criminals is different, even the way we handle civil disputes is different. At the beginning, the constitution served as an application to that era’s disputes and defiances. Today we are seeing new issues arising. Human rights, police brutality, protesting in a criminally provocative way , yes, you name

States have always been sensitive about the amount of power they have; the federal government has always had to step carefully around the demands of the states. This has been true since the beginning of the United States. But both believe that they should have the most power when it comes to certain things. Individual states have different values and as such tend to implement different laws about certain topics; such states want their state laws to reflect these individual values instead of a blanket law from the federal government. States should have less power compared to the federal government when implementing laws dealing with topics such as the legalization of marijuana, gay marriage, and abortion.

The Tenth Amendment protects Americans from intrusive federal government action, The federal government only has powers listed in the constitution. Sometimes the federal government may try to do whatever they want, but do not consider the state powers. Federal government must follow the constitution thoroughly because they are only specifically reserved to that.

What are ways the constitution limits the power of the federal government? There are three different ways the constitution limits power. The three different ways are the system of checks and balances, the bill of rights, and federalism. Along with ways the constitution limits power, there are the three branches of government as well. The first branch is the legislative branch, the second is the executive branch, and the third and final branch is the judicial branch. Each branch in the government has a lot of power and they use several ways to distribute their power evenly among other branches.

Recently, the federal government has crossed the line in regards to its actual power. In passing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the federal government is essentially ignoring many vital sections of the Constitution that help keep it in check. These fundamental restrictions help prevent an abusive and tyrannical government. The fact that this law still remains in place today shows that these constitutional restrictions on the federal government no longer apply, and that the federal government essentially has unlimited power. This act is unconstitutional due to its violation of the Commerce Clause, the Tenth Amendment, and the Origination Clause.

The government restricts our rights to better protect American citizens. They took away our free speech and freedom of the press, legal rights, and our privacy. When they do this the law is usually undone later. They do this to protect us but the end up going too far.

The Constitution of the United States of America, and its powers within, is supposed to support the overall liberty of our nation. In 1798, James Madison and Thomas Jefferson sought to fight for the states right to nullify laws that they deemed unconstitutional. This fight was spurred by the Alien and Sedation Acts which were “considered unconstitutional because they infringed on the reserved powers of the states” (“Virginia and Kentucky resolutions,” n.d., para. 2). The language in these resolutions was later brought to light in 1832 in support of the nullification position taken by South Carolina pertaining to the high tariffs on imports that the government imposed. In the end, the fight for states’ rights was neutralized by the Force

Why did the framers of the United States Constitution ultimately decide to give more power to the federal government, rather than the state governments? There are many reasons for the decisions that people make or previously made in our history. Many of these reasons are discussed later in this document, such as the Articles of Confederation, Federal Government, State Government, Constitutions contents about Federal and State power.

The people are the basis for any power that the federal government preserves and must always protect those who empower them. The written Constitution they created was not to define the rights of the people, but to limit the powers the national government would hold over the people. The Constitution would create a National government that would create a strong federal government, while safeguarding the rights of the people, and conserving checks on power it holds. The framers did not believe in cataloging individual rights in the constitution. They believed it would be threatening to define the rights that the people hold. Alexander Hamilton specifically believed that the Constitution had no power to infringe on the natural rights that all people have. However, the Bill of Rights was created from a compromise and thus, created the first ten amendments to the Constitution. These rights listed protections from the National government. These rights have proven to be security against the federal governments use of an enumerated power that they might hold. It is important for this very reason to have a written Bill of Rights in the United States Constitution. It does not define what rights the people hold, it defines what the government is entrusted to protect: the people. It is for this reason that I agree that the Bill of Rights was necessary to be written in the

While this was intended to allow for individual states to handle things their own way and interpret laws differently, it has instead resulted in the consolidation of power into the hands of the federal government. Judges looking to change things for the better interpret the law in ways that will allow "reasonable" regulations and laws, but that is not the purpose of a judge. Laws are written in Legal English, a language all its own, and in this language words have specific meanings. When the 2nd Amendment says "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" (US Const. Amend. 2), it is using very strong language in legalese. To give an example of the meaning of "shall not be infringed," take Bill of Rights author James Madison's proposal for religious freedom: "nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext, infringed.***citation***" His intent was obviously not to allow numerous "reasonable" regulations on rights of conscience, ie religious choice and practice. Likewise was the intent towards the right to keep and bear arms. Senate Bill 656 is still an infringement on that right, but it is less so than was previously the law. Again, as with previous arguments, any step back towards the original purpose of the 2nd Amendment is a worthy

But WHY? Why has the power of the federal government expanded so significantly? Was this shift in power from state governments to the federal government necessary?

The first amendment of the constitution is a fundamental building block of our liberty. Without it, tyrannical ideals could encompass America with nothing to stop it. With the application of the first amendment the government is kept in check through itself, regulating its own rights and balancing its power. Though perhaps more importantly, this right gives the people the power to petition and address the government with their own concerns; through these rights, the people have the ability to regulate the government’s regulation of itself, and therein lies the absolute

The limits of power on the executive branch are continuously growing and expanding, because presidents have continued to push the boundaries to accomplish their own goals for the nation.

The five limits of government in a democratic society are consent of the governed, rights of the minority, separation of power, constitution and rule of law. Although all five play an important role in today's society, some would be considered more needed than others. The most important limit is constitution. The constitution states every law and procedure that is needed to run the country more smoothly. The second most important out of the five would be rule of law. The rule of law means no man is above the law and laws are fair. The third and fourth most important limit are the rights of the minority and the consent of the governed. Minority rights means the law applies to everyone and consent of the governed allows all citizens to choose for themselves who they want to run the country . Lastly, the least important but much needed limit of government is separation of powers and that is used to make sure not one person has total control.