The Constitution: What If It Was Different?

The US Constitution has evolved significantly since its inception in 1787. The document replaced the Articles of Confederation, which lacked enforcement powers and the ability to regulate commerce or print money, threatening to tear the young nation apart. The Constitution aimed to establish a powerful central government, sparking debate between Federalists and Anti-Federalists. Amendments have been made to abolish slavery, ensure equal protection under the law, and grant voting rights to African Americans and women. The presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt marked a shift towards expanded executive power, and the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution has evolved, including recognizing corporations as persons. The Constitution's endurance and evolution demonstrate its adaptability to the changing needs and values of American society.

Explore related products

Alternative Tracks: The Constitution of American Industrial Order, 1865-1917 (The Johns Hopkins Series in Constitutional Thought)

$28.86 $33

Alternative Constitutions for the United States: A Documentary History (Contributions in American History)

$95

Our Bodies, Our Crimes: The Policing of Women’s Reproduction in America (Alternative Criminology, 16)

$20.93 $26

The Rise of the Constitutional Alternative to Soviet Rule in 1918

$45 $67.5

The China Race: Global Competition for Alternative World Orders

$24.87 $37.95

Imperial Reconstruction 1763-1840: The Evolution of Alternative Systems of Colonial Government; Select Documents on the Constitutional History of the British Empire and Commonwealth Volume III (Documents in Imperial History)

$109

The Articles of Confederation

The Articles established a Congress where each state, regardless of population, held one vote. However, the document was nearly impossible to amend as it required unanimous consent from all 13 states. The central government lacked the power to enforce its authority, regulate commerce, collect taxes, or print money, leading to economic instability and difficulties in maintaining an effective military.

The states' disputes over territory, war pensions, taxation, and trade threatened to tear the country apart. James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and George Washington were among those who feared the young nation was on the brink of collapse. In May 1787, delegates assembled at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia to revise the Articles of Confederation, ultimately resulting in the creation of a new constitution with a more powerful central government.

The Anti-Federalists opposed the new Constitution due to its strong central government and the lack of a bill of rights. However, Federalists argued that a strong central government was necessary to address the nation's challenges. The ratification process was challenging, but compromises, such as "vote now, amend later," helped secure victory. The new Constitution, signed by 39 delegates, replaced the Articles of Confederation in 1789.

The role of the president

One way the role of the president could have turned out differently is if the Anti-Federalists had succeeded in their opposition to the Constitution. The Anti-Federalists fought against the creation of a powerful central government, which reminded them of the one they had just overthrown. They also argued that the territory of the 13 states was too extensive for a representative government and that it would be dominated by the wealthy and oppressive of the lower classes. If the Anti-Federalists had gained more traction, the role of the president as the head of a powerful central government might have been significantly curtailed or altered.

Additionally, the role of the president could have been different if the Articles of Confederation had been amended instead of replaced. The Articles of Confederation, America's first constitution, gave the Confederation Congress the power to make rules and request funds from the states, but it lacked enforcement powers and the ability to regulate commerce or print money. If the Articles had been successfully amended to address these issues, the need for a new constitution and a stronger central government may have been averted.

Furthermore, the role of the president might have been different if the Constitution had included a bill of rights from the outset. The absence of a bill of rights was a point of contention for the Anti-Federalists, and it took time and amendments to spell out the rights of Americans. A constitution that initially included a comprehensive bill of rights may have shaped the role and responsibilities of the president differently.

Lastly, the role of the president could be influenced by external factors, such as the size and diversity of the country. As the United States expanded, the challenge of governing such a vast and diverse nation may have required a different approach to the executive branch. The role of the president may have had to adapt to accommodate the unique needs and challenges of a growing and changing nation.

The Federalists' influence

The Federalists, who believed in a strong central government, played a significant role in shaping the US Constitution. Their influence can be seen in the following ways:

The Federalist Papers

Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison penned The Federalist Papers during 1787-88. These papers outlined the Federalist ideology and their support for the Constitution. The Federalists believed that a strong central government was necessary to address the nation's challenges and safeguard the liberty and independence gained through the American Revolution. They saw the weaknesses of the central government under the Articles of Confederation, which had led to disputes over territory, war pensions, taxation, and trade, threatening to tear the young nation apart.

Political Philosophy and Leadership

The Federalists developed a new political philosophy, but their strength also lay in their leadership. Many talented leaders of the era, including experienced national-level figures such as Benjamin Franklin and George Washington, were Federalists. They had the support of most newspapers, which helped spread their ideas and gain approval for the Constitution.

Shaping the Constitution

The Federalists were instrumental in shaping the new US Constitution in 1787. The Constitution created a powerful central government, which the Federalists believed was necessary to prevent the excesses of democracy, as seen in popular disturbances like Shays' Rebellion. The Federalists' influence resulted in a constitution that strengthened the national government, which, according to Anti-Federalists, came at the expense of the states and the people.

Ratification of the Constitution

The Federalists faced opposition from the Anti-Federalists, who fought against the ratification of the Constitution due to their concerns about central power and the lack of a bill of rights. The ratification campaign was a close contest, but the Federalists were able to secure victory in key states, ultimately leading to the enactment of the new government.

Explore related products

Explicit and Authentic Acts: Amending the U.S. Constitution, 1776-1995

$21.01 $55

The Case for Israel

$12.54 $17.99

Four Pillars of Constitutionalism: The Organic Laws of the United States

$48

Ringworm, Its Constitutional Nature and #

$13.95

Alternative Politics in Contemporary Japan: New Directions in Social Movements

$70 $70

The New Systems Reader

$23.77 $51.99

Amendments and slavery

The US Constitution has been amended several times since its inception in 1787, with amendments playing a significant role in shaping the country's history, particularly regarding slavery.

The Thirteenth Amendment, also known as the Abolition of Slavery Amendment, is a notable example. Passed by Congress on January 31, 1865, and ratified on December 6, 1865, it abolished slavery and prohibited involuntary servitude in the United States and its territories, except as punishment for a crime. This amendment was a significant departure from the original Constitution, which implicitly recognised slavery through provisions like the Three-Fifths Compromise, allocating congressional representation based on a state's population of "free persons" and "three-fifths of all other persons".

The Reconstruction Amendments, which included the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments, were adopted following the American Civil War to further solidify the abolition of slavery and extend civil rights to African Americans. The Fourteenth Amendment granted citizenship to African Americans, overturning the Supreme Court's ruling in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which had treated slaves as property. The Fifteenth Amendment ensured voting rights for Black men, although these rights were often restricted in Southern states.

The amendments related to slavery had a profound impact on the country's history and set the stage for ongoing efforts to address racial inequality and ensure equal rights for all Americans. They represent a significant departure from the original Constitution, which lacked explicit protections against slavery and had provisions that implicitly recognised it.

While the Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery, it did not eradicate all forms of discrimination or modern slavery. It has been invoked to empower Congress to legislate against contemporary forms of slavery, such as sex trafficking. Additionally, the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment in cases like Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company (1886) has had a significant impact on corporate rights, recognising corporations as "persons" with associated rights.

Women's suffrage

The first women's rights convention, held in Seneca Falls, New York, in 1848, produced a list of demands called the Declaration of Sentiments. This document, modelled on the Declaration of Independence, called for broader educational and professional opportunities for women, as well as the right of married women to control their wages and property. After this historic gathering, women's voting rights became a central issue in the emerging debate about women's rights in the United States.

Despite the efforts of suffragists, there was strong opposition to enfranchising women. Anti-suffrage groups, such as the New York State Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage (NYSAOWS), used grassroots mobilisation techniques and counter-crusading styles to warn of the evils that suffrage would bring to women. They also stressed the importance of independent women in philanthropy and social betterment. Additionally, Jim Crow attitudes meant that the expansion of the vote to women, which would have included Black women, was strongly opposed.

It wasn't until 1919 that Congress finally passed the 19th Amendment, which granted women the right to vote. The amendment was ratified on August 18, 1920, when Tennessee became the 36th state to ratify it, crossing the three-fourths-of-states threshold needed for passage. This victory, however, did not ensure full enfranchisement, as decades of struggle remained to include African Americans and other minority women in the promise of voting rights.

Frequently asked questions