Download Prompt: #7 Analyze how arguments over the meaning and

Prompt: #7
Analyze how arguments over the meaning and interpretation of the constitution affected US politics from early republic through
reconstruction period.
Context:
After shay's rebellion, the United States realized that the articles of confederation were not strong enough to control the United States.
Politicians from Georgia to Massachusetts came together and created the constitution which still exists today. Since then, people have
debated the constitution over its powers. There are two well known constitutional interpretations: strict and loose. Strict
constructionists desire a decentralized federal government that would give more power to the states. They believed that the
Constitution must clearly state a law in order for it to be legal. If not said in the Constitution, then it's illegal. People who wanted a strict
interpretation of the constitution were generally anti federalist and whose viewpoints were represented by Thomas Jefferson. The loose
constructionists were people who desired a strong central government with less power to the states. They believed that if a law
was necessary and proper but not allowed for clearly in the Constitution, then that law or provision could be legal. People who wanted a
loose interpretation were typically Federalist and whose views were represented by Alexander Hamilton. Since then, political parties
have been formed based on ideals over how the Constitution should be interpreted: Loosely or Strictly. These debates still continue to
this day.
Thesis:
The differences in interpretations of the constitution have divided the country's politics since the days of the early republic until today as
evidence by the Nullification Crisis, Jackson’s Veto of Charter of Second Bank, the Southern secession from the Union among other
examples.
Evidence:
Analysis :
BEFORE CONSTITUTION:
Articles of Confederation
drafted by Second Continental Congress after we
won war and promotes unity and liberty
the government wanted the states to stay together
so permitted mostly states rights
There were many pros and cons of the Articles of Confederation.
Pros:
negotiated Treaty of Paris
Northwest Ordinance- new states not colonies, slavery
illegal in north, civil rights for all citizens
Cons:
hurt country financially
didn’t structure congress well- national government had very
little power(hard to pass anything)
only state militias
Shay’s Rebellion happens and US realizes they need a stronger
central government
CONSTITUTION CREATED IN 1887
The constitution creates a stronger central government than before
by creating national executive and judicial branches with a lot of
power and congress with the ability to pass laws and amendments
Bill of Rights
Antifederalists were very worried about the
Constitution giving too much power to the federal
government and taking it away from the states.
Congress then created the bill of rights which
amends the constitution
The Bill of Rights was created to satisfy the men who wanted states
rights and worried about a possible tyranny. One of their main
concerns was the “Necessary and Proper Clause” which said that
the federal government could pass a law that seemed necessary. This
scared the antifederalist and eventually split the US into two political
parties: Federalists who supported a loose interpretation of the
constitution and more federal power and Democratic Republicans or
Anti-Federalists who wanted more states rights and a strict
interpretation of the constitution.
Hamilton’s Financial Plans: Bank of U.S, etc.
He was one of the leaders of the Federalist party
Sought to help U.S pay off debt and make Country
economically stronger
His plan wanted to show other countries that the
US was a good country to invest in (good credit)
Hamilton and the federalists were nationalists. There was nothing in
Constitution that didn’t permit a Bank of the United States. So by
loose interpretation of Constitution, he created a set of financial
plans to assume state debts, give out IOUs, establish a national
income, and regulate the currency and create a bank. This
benefited Central government. Strict interpretation by Anti-Federalists
who felt the Constitution didn’t allow for the Central Govt. to have a
National Bank
Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions
Created to fight power of the Alien and Sedition
Acts. Alien Act gave president power to deport
any alien known to be dangerous. Sedition Act
punished people for saying something that could
defame US Govt. Both acts were repealed because
they were considered unconstitutional
Example of strict interpretation of Constitution. Showed power of
states to overrule federal government when something was unjust.
Acts took away life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness as well as
Freedom of Speech before they were repealed
Louisiana Purchase
Opportunity for the United States to expand as a
country. No provision or law that discussed what
to do about expanding the country. Jefferson
always championed westward expansion so he
bought the land from France
Loose interpretation of the Constitution because President Jefferson
took advantage of there being no law in Constitution that clearly
discussed what to do about westward expansion. Strict interpreters
would have felt that you could not expand the Country because
nothing was clearly stated about expansion. Precedent for Manifest
Destiny
Nullification Crisis
Tariffs of 1828 and 1832 were protective tariffs to
help support Northern industries. South Carolina
was not satisfied with the tariff of 1832. Nullified
both tariff of 1828 and 1832 at a state convention.
Andrew Jackson thought this was absurd and
asked Congress to pass Force Act to make South
Carolina go along with Act or he would send the
Military to enforce it
This is an example of how a state wanted a strict interpretation
because they felt it was unfair to tax a state that wouldn’t benefit
economically from the tax. People of South Carolina believed in
states rights. Felt states should have more power and could nullify a
tax when they felt it was necessary.
Jackson’s Veto of Charter of Second Bank
Jackson felt that Bank helped the wealthy and not
the “common man”. Questioned the
constitutionality of the Bank and felt that that
power should be held by the states. Vetoed the
Bank’s re-charter which destroyed the Bank.
Jackson felt the Bank was unconstitutional and is an example of strict
interpretation of Constitution. Since nothing in the Constitution
clearly talked about a Bank, Jackson felt there could be no Bank.
Intended to help the states by splitting up the Bank’s money to give to
state banks across the country. Led to economic depression because
the bank had regulated economy and helped to avoid inflation.
South Seceding from union
Final straw when Lincoln was elected. Felt they
had no choice but to secede so they could maintain
their way of life (slavery, etc.). Felt they were
prevented from expanding slavery and mad at
Union for supporting John Brown’s raid at
Harpers’ Ferry
No provision in Constitution that said the South could secede. Strict
interpretation by North and Loose interpretation by South.
There was arguments about this in congress throughout the
continuation of the war. The north saw the south’s secession as
illegal which would be a strict interpretation because it is never
mentioned or predicted when the constitution was written. The South
thought it was fair and legal because if you join the union legally
you should be able to secede from it as well.
Readmission of Southern States
Once Union defeated Confederacy, there were
questions about what to do with the Southern
states. Lincoln proposed ten percent plan to easily
readmit the states. Congress preferred
Wade-Davis Bill which required 50 % of
southerners to vow oath of loyalty to Union, not
10%. Neither one was passed
The Constitution did not plan for a secession so there was debate over
regulations over readmitting southern states. Loose interpretation
because since there was nothing clearly discussed about how to
readmit states, the Union could readmit the states however they
wanted to. South was put into Military districts temporarily before
they could be reinstated.
Women’s Rights
Between the Early Republic and Reconstruction
era, the women of society had little government
power
After the black men get rights, they hope to gain
more as well
Wyoming territory is first to grant women with
full voting rights in 1870s
Takes until 1900s for all women to voting rights
Women worked hard during the wars and believed that they should
gain more power. The Seneca Falls Convention raised awareness
about women’s desire for more rights.
Women would not get right the right to vote until 1920.
For a very long time, all men in government did not want to allow
women the right to vote. The government followed a strict
interpretation of women’s rights in the constitution because it was
never mentioned. Women on the other hand advocated for their rights
because it was not in the constitution which was a loose
interpretation.