Omar Bennett
The Constitution was ratified by a supermajority of states, which was likely the cause of some of its most desirable provisions. If a mere majority of states had been able to ratify the Constitution, it is possible that the document would not have provided for a strong constitutional federalism. The supermajority requirement meant that the Federalists were forced to abandon their opposition to a bill of rights and promise that the new government would enact such a bill. The Bill of Rights is also probably the result of the supermajority requirement.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| A supermajority was required to ratify the Constitution | Yes |
| A supermajority was required to enact the Bill of Rights | Yes |
| The supermajority requirement was likely the cause of some of the Constitution's most desirable provisions | Yes |
| The supermajority requirement was likely the cause of the Bill of Rights | Yes |
| The supermajority requirement was likely the cause of strong constitutional federalism | Yes |
| The supermajority requirement forced the Federalists to abandon their opposition to a bill of rights | Yes |
| The supermajority requirement forced the Federalists to promise to enact a bill of rights once the government was established | Yes |
| The supermajority requirement forced the convention to include significant constitutional protections for states | Yes |
| The supermajority requirement for the Constitution was likely nine states | Yes |
| The supermajority requirement for amendments to the Constitution is two-thirds of each body of the United States Congress | Yes |
| The supermajority requirement for amendments to the Constitution can also be a convention called by Congress on application of two-thirds of the states | Yes |
| The supermajority requirement for amendments to the Constitution to be ratified is three-quarters of the states | Yes |
| The supermajority requirement for Congress to override a presidential veto is two-thirds of both houses | Yes |
| The supermajority requirement for a treaty to enter into force and effect is two-thirds of the Senate | Yes |
| The supermajority requirement for amendments to state constitutions varies by state | Yes |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
The supermajority requirement for enacting the Constitution
The Federalists were therefore forced to abandon their opposition to a bill of rights and to promise that the new government would enact such a bill once it was established. If the Constitution could have been ratified with a mere majority of the states, it is very possible that the Federalists could have avoided making that promise. Thus, the Bill of Rights was also likely the result of the supermajority requirement of Article VII.
It might be argued that the Constitution was the result of majority rule, because each state’s convention ratified it using a majority voting rule. But the fact that each state ratified by majority vote does not mean that the constitutional enactment process as a whole should be understood as majoritarian.
Amendments to the Constitution may be proposed in one of two ways: a two-thirds supermajority vote of each body of the United States Congress or a convention called by Congress on application of two-thirds (currently 34) of the states. Once proposed, the amendment must be ratified by three-quarters (currently 38) of the states (either through the state legislatures or ratification conventions, whichever "mode of ratification" Congress selects).
Texas Constitution: Ratification and Its Legacy
You may want to see also
The Bill of Rights
The supermajority requirement for enacting the Constitution was likely the cause of some of its most desirable provisions. The drafters knew that it would need to secure a significant supermajority, and so the document provided for a strong constitutional federalism. The convention was forced to include significant constitutional protections for states because of the need to secure ratification by a supermajority of states.
Amendments to the Constitution may be proposed in one of two ways: a two-thirds supermajority vote of each body of the United States Congress or a convention called by Congress on application of two-thirds (currently 34) of the states. Once proposed, the amendment must be ratified by three-quarters (currently 38) of the states.
Anti-Federalist Constitution Ratification: Main Opposition Arguments
You may want to see also
The Federalists' opposition to a bill of rights
However, the Federalists were forced to abandon their opposition to a bill of rights and promise that the new government would enact such a bill once it was established. This was because the Constitution could only be ratified with a supermajority of the states, and there was insufficient support to secure ratification in the nine required states without a bill of rights.
The Anti-Federalists, on the other hand, argued that a bill of rights was necessary to protect Americans' civil liberties. They were chiefly concerned with too much power being invested in the national government at the expense of the states. They believed that the supremacy clause, in combination with the necessary and proper and general welfare clauses, would allow implied powers that could endanger rights. They also argued that in a state of nature, people were entirely free, and that some rights were so fundamental that to give them up would be contrary to the common good. These rights, they argued, needed to be explicitly stated in a bill of rights that would clearly define the limits of government.
The Constitution and Georgia: A Ratification Story
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The constitutional enactment process
A supermajority requirement refers to the need for a significant majority, typically more than a simple majority, to approve a decision or action. In the case of the US Constitution, the drafters knew that securing ratification by a supermajority of states was essential. This requirement likely influenced the inclusion of certain provisions and protections within the Constitution.
The specific process for enacting the Constitution involved each state's convention ratifying it using a majority voting rule. However, it's important to note that the overall constitutional enactment process cannot be solely understood as majoritarian. The Federalists, for instance, were forced to abandon their opposition to a bill of rights and promise to enact such a bill due to the supermajority requirement.
Additionally, the Bill of Rights itself is likely a result of the supermajority requirement. During the ratification debates, there seemed to be insufficient support to secure ratification in the required number of states. This highlights the impact of the supermajority requirement on the overall constitutional enactment process.
Furthermore, the specific requirements for a supermajority can vary. In some cases, a two-thirds supermajority of both chambers is needed, while in other instances, only a three-fifths supermajority or a simple majority is required. The specific supermajority threshold depends on the context and the rules established by the relevant governing body.
The Constitution's Ratification: Understanding America's Founding Document
You may want to see also
Amendments to the Constitution
The Constitution was ratified by a supermajority of states. The supermajority requirement for enacting the Constitution was likely the cause of some of its most desirable provisions. If a mere majority of the states could have enacted the Constitution, it is quite possible that the document would not have provided for a strong constitutional federalism.
The Federalists were forced to abandon their opposition to a bill of rights and to promise that the new government would enact such a bill once it was established. The Bill of Rights was also probably the result of the supermajority requirement of Article VII.
In most states, a two-thirds supermajority of both chambers is required to amend the state constitution. However, in some states, only a three-fifths supermajority is required, while in others, only a normal majority is needed.
The Constitution's Ratification: A Historical Perspective
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Yes, a supermajority was required to ratify the Constitution.
A supermajority is a higher threshold than a simple majority. In most states, a two-thirds supermajority of both chambers is required to override a governor's veto of legislation. However, in some states, only a three-fifths supermajority is needed, while in others, a normal majority suffices.
The supermajority requirement for enacting the Constitution was likely responsible for some of its most desirable provisions, such as the Bill of Rights. The Federalists, for instance, were forced to promise a bill of rights because of the supermajority requirement.
Nine states were required to ratify the Constitution.
