Eleanor Finch
The ratification of the U.S. Constitution was a complex process that involved a dual approach: explaining the proposed Constitution and its design, and implementing a ratification process that would produce a positive result. The delegates to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on September 17, 1787, voted to approve the document, but it still had to be ratified by the states. Article VII, the final article of the Constitution, required ratification by nine of the thirteen states before it could become law and a new government could form. This process faced resistance due to concerns about the relative power of state and federal governments, with some fearing that increasing the powers of the national government would come at the expense of the states.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Article of the Constitution | VII |
| Number of states required to ratify the Constitution | 9 of 13 |
| Power of Congress | To propose an amendment and determine the mode of ratification |
| Time limits | Congress can impose a time limit for ratification |
| Amendment process | Triggered by a perception of "necessity" |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
- Article VII of the Constitution required that the document be ratified by nine of the thirteen states
- The delegates to the Constitutional Convention implemented a dual approach to achieving ratification
- Article V of the Constitution gives Congress the power to propose an amendment and determine the mode of ratification
- The greatest sticking point when it came to ratification was the relative power of the state and federal governments
- The publication of the Federalist Papers by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay in several New York newspapers is an example of the ratification process
Article VII of the Constitution required that the document be ratified by nine of the thirteen states
The delegates to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia voted to approve the document on September 17, 1787. Copies of the Constitution were then sent to each of the states, which were to hold ratifying conventions to either accept or reject it.
The ratification of the Constitution was a complex process that involved a dual approach. The delegates implemented a program to explain what the proposed Constitution was and what it aimed to accomplish. They also had to consider the relative power of the state and federal governments, with some resisting increasing the powers of the national government at the expense of the states.
Women's Suffrage: A Constitutional Conundrum
You may want to see also
The delegates to the Constitutional Convention implemented a dual approach to achieving ratification
The delegates to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia voted to approve the document they had drafted on 17 September 1787. Some did not support it, but the majority did. Before it could become the law of the land, however, the Constitution faced another hurdle: it had to be ratified by the states. Article VII, the final article of the Constitution, required that before the Constitution could become law and a new government could form, the document had to be ratified by nine of the thirteen states. Eleven days after the delegates at the Philadelphia convention approved it, copies of the Constitution were sent to each of the states, which were to hold ratifying conventions to either accept or reject it.
The greatest sticking point when it came to ratification, as it had been at the Constitutional Convention itself, was the relative power of the state and federal governments. The framers of the Constitution believed that without the ability to maintain and command an army and navy, impose taxes, and force the states to comply with laws passed by Congress, the young nation would not survive for very long. But many people resisted increasing the powers of the national government at the expense of the states. Virginia’s Patrick Henry, for example, feared that the newly created office of president would place excessive power in the hands of one man.
Article V of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to propose an amendment and to determine the mode of ratification, but it is silent as to the power of Congress to impose time limits or its role after ratification by three-fourths of the states. A 1921 Supreme Court decision (Dillon v. Gloss) affirmed that Congress has the power to fix a definite time limit for ratification; it also pointed out that an amendment becomes part of the Constitution once ratified by the final state constituting a three-fourths majority of the states.
Challenges to Constitution Ratification: Overcoming Obstacles
You may want to see also
Article V of the Constitution gives Congress the power to propose an amendment and determine the mode of ratification
Article V of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to propose an amendment and determine the mode of ratification. This means that Congress can propose changes to the Constitution and decide how those changes should be ratified. However, it is important to note that Article V does not explicitly address the power of Congress to impose time limits or its role after ratification by three-fourths of the states.
The ratification process for the U.S. Constitution was a complex and lengthy endeavour. The delegates to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on September 17, 1787, voted to approve the document they had drafted, but it still needed to be ratified by the states before it could become the law of the land. This dual approach to achieving ratification involved explaining the proposed Constitution and its aims, as well as implementing a process to secure its adoption.
Article VII, the final article of the Constitution, required ratification by nine of the thirteen states before a new government could be formed. Copies of the Constitution were sent to each state, which held ratifying conventions to either accept or reject it. This process was not without its challenges, as the relative power of the state and federal governments was a significant point of contention.
The framers of the Constitution believed that the young nation needed the power to maintain and command an army and navy, impose taxes, and ensure state compliance with laws passed by Congress. However, many people resisted increasing the powers of the national government at the expense of the states. The balance between state and federal power was a delicate issue that required careful consideration and compromise.
The Process of Ratifying the US Constitution
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The greatest sticking point when it came to ratification was the relative power of the state and federal governments
The framers of the Constitution believed that without the ability to maintain and command an army and navy, impose taxes, and force the states to comply with laws passed by Congress, the young nation would not survive for very long. However, many people were concerned about the concentration of power in the federal government and the potential erosion of state power.
Article VII, the final article of the Constitution, required that before the Constitution could become law and a new government could form, the document had to be ratified by nine of the thirteen states. Copies of the Constitution were sent to each of the states, which were to hold ratifying conventions to either accept or reject it.
Additionally, Article V of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to propose an amendment and determine the mode of ratification. A 1921 Supreme Court decision (Dillon v. Gloss) affirmed that Congress has the power to fix a definite time limit for ratification.
Benjamin Franklin's Role in Ratifying the Constitution
You may want to see also
The publication of the Federalist Papers by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay in several New York newspapers is an example of the ratification process
Article VII of the US Constitution required that the document be ratified by nine of the thirteen states before it could become law and a new government could be formed. The delegates to the Constitutional Convention implemented a dual approach to achieving ratification of their proposed Constitution. The publication of the Federalist Papers by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay in several New York newspapers is the most famous example of this. The Federalist Papers explained what the proposed Constitution was and what its design aimed to accomplish. The authors of the Federalist Papers were confident that New York would be against a diminution of its state power as a large state in the league of friendship. The greatest sticking point when it came to ratification was the relative power of the state and federal governments. The framers of the Constitution believed that without the ability to maintain and command an army and navy, impose taxes, and force the states to comply with laws passed by Congress, the young nation would not survive for very long. However, many people resisted increasing the powers of the national government at the expense of the states.
Federalists' Push for Constitution Ratification Explained
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The delegates to the Constitutional Convention implemented a dual approach to achieving ratification of their proposed Constitution. This included a program to explain what the proposed Constitution was and what its design aimed to accomplish. The publication of the Federalist Papers by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay in several New York newspapers is the most famous example. The second part of the process was a ratification process that would have the best chance of producing a positive result, namely the adoption of the Constitution.
Article VII, the final article of the Constitution, required that before the Constitution could become law and a new government could form, the document had to be ratified by nine of the thirteen states.
The greatest sticking point when it came to ratification was the relative power of the state and federal governments. The framers of the Constitution believed that without the ability to maintain and command an army and navy, impose taxes, and force the states to comply with laws passed by Congress, the young nation would not survive for very long.
![The history of political parties in the state of New-York, from the ratification of the federal Constitution to December, 1840 ... / By Jabez D. Hammond, LL. D. Volume v.1 1850 [Leather Bound]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/416JPiaex-L._AC_UY218_.jpg)
