Isabella Carter
The United States Constitution is a living document that has been amended several times to reflect the evolving values and beliefs of American society. While amendments are typically passed to overwrite parts of the existing constitution, conflicts between different amendments can arise. For example, the infamous Dred Scott decision, which stated that the 5th Amendment prohibited the federal government from freeing slaves, was superseded by the 13th Amendment, which banned slavery. In such cases, it is generally accepted that the newer amendment takes precedence, as it is assumed that the drafters of the new amendment are aware of existing laws and amendments and intentionally create an exception. Ultimately, it is the role of the judiciary, specifically the Supreme Court, to interpret the Constitution and resolve any conflicts that may arise between different amendments.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Determining conflicts between constitutional amendments | The judiciary interprets law and decides how conflicts should be resolved |
| Constitutional amendments overwriting parts of the existing constitution | The 13th Amendment banning slavery overrides the Dred Scott decision that the 5th Amendment prohibited the federal government from freeing slaves |
| Unconstitutional constitutional amendments | An amendment that conflicts with a constitutional value or principle can be deemed unconstitutional |
| Supremacy Clause | Federal statutes can displace or "preempt" state law |
| Constitutional amendments and popular sovereignty | The US Supreme Court's adoption of the unconstitutional constitutional amendment doctrine could undermine popular sovereignty |
| Amendments to a constitution | Amendments can be revisions to previous text or appended to the end of the main text as special articles |
Explore related products
$30.84 $39.95
What You'll Learn
The Supremacy Clause
The core message of the Supremacy Clause is that the Constitution and federal laws take precedence over any conflicting rules of state law. This principle is now so familiar that it is often taken for granted. The Supremacy Clause contains the Constitution's most explicit references to "judicial review", the idea that even duly enacted statutes do not supply rules of decision for courts to the extent that the statutes are unconstitutional.
Women's Suffrage: Constitutional Amendment for Equality
You may want to see also
The Reconstruction Amendments
The Thirteenth Amendment, ratified in 1865, abolished slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime. It was proposed in 1864 and swiftly ratified by all but three Union states. The Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, addresses citizenship rights and equal protection of the laws for all persons. It defines all people born in the United States as citizens and requires due process of law and equal protection for all. Thaddeus Stevens, the Republican floor leader in the House of Representatives, was a key figure in the passage of this amendment. Stevens, a lifelong advocate for equal rights for Black Americans, believed that Reconstruction was a golden opportunity to transform the United States from a country that was "half slave and half free."
The Fifteenth Amendment, which became part of the Constitution in 1870, prohibits federal and state governments from denying a citizen the right to vote based on race, colour, or previous condition of servitude. However, it did not address other forms of disenfranchisement, such as those based on sex, property ownership, literacy, or payment of a poll tax. The Reconstruction Amendments were intended to guarantee the freedom of the formerly enslaved, grant them certain civil rights, and protect them and all citizens of the United States from discrimination.
While these amendments were significant steps towards equality for Black Americans, their promise was eroded by state laws and federal court decisions throughout the late 19th century. Important Supreme Court decisions that undermined these amendments included the Slaughter-House Cases in 1873 and Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, which gave federal approval to Jim Crow laws that limited the rights of African Americans. It was not until the Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education in 1954 and the passage of laws such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that the full benefits of the Reconstruction Amendments were realised.
Amendment History: The Second Amendment's Origin Story
You may want to see also
The role of the Supreme Court
The US Constitution is a legal document and, as such, is subject to interpretation by the judiciary. The US Supreme Court is the highest court in the land and has the power to interpret the Constitution and federal law, and reverse the decisions of state supreme courts.
The Supreme Court's role is to rule on the constitutionality of laws and government actions. This includes interpreting the Constitution and deciding how conflicts between constitutional amendments should be resolved. The Court's rulings are meant to be consistent with the Supreme Law of the Land, but that does not mean the Supreme Law is defined by the Court's rulings.
The Supreme Court does not have the authority to amend the Constitution. However, it can decide how conflicts between amendments should be resolved and has the power to reverse lower court decisions. The Court's rulings are based on precedent and the interpretation of the Constitution and federal law.
When interpreting regulations, more specific rules take precedence over general rules. This means that later amendments can override the provisions in the Bill of Rights. For example, the 13th Amendment, which banned slavery, superseded the Dred Scott decision, which stated that the 5th Amendment prohibited the federal government from freeing slaves.
The Supreme Court has also recognised that federal statutes can displace or "preempt" state law. Federal statutes may include express "preemption clauses" that forbid states from enacting or enforcing certain laws. Additionally, the Supreme Court has, at times, acquiesced to expansive congressional claims of power, as seen during the New Deal and the Warren Court era.
The Right to Abortion: Constitutional Amendments Explored
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Popular sovereignty
In the US, the Ninth and Tenth Amendments evoke themes of popular sovereignty. The Ninth Amendment warns against inferring the scope of people's rights from a partial list of rights, while the Tenth Amendment warns against using a list of rights to imply powers for the national government that were not granted. The Tenth Amendment also protects state sovereignty, serving as a check on federal and state laws that infringe on popular sovereignty.
The Tenth Amendment has been interpreted by the Supreme Court in various cases, including Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority, where the Court held that state sovereignty interests should be protected through participation in the national political process. In National League of Cities v. Usery, the Court found that Congress could not impair attributes of state sovereignty, such as determining wages for state employees.
While the Supremacy Clause gives priority to federal laws over conflicting state laws, the Supreme Court has the power to interpret the Constitution and resolve conflicts between federal and state laws. The Court's rulings are meant to be consistent with the Supreme Law of the Land, but lower courts seek to rule consistently with Supreme Court precedent to avoid being overruled.
The First Amendment: Church and State Separation
You may want to see also
Amendments as revisions vs. special articles
The interpretation of the Constitution is a role fulfilled by the judiciary, with the Supreme Court being the highest court in the United States. While legislative bodies write and pass laws, it is the role of the judiciary to interpret them.
In the case of conflicting constitutional amendments, the more specific amendment takes precedence over the general one. This allows later amendments to override older, more general provisions. For example, the First Amendment limits the powers of Congress, despite not explicitly repealing any part of Article I.
Constitutional amendments are often passed to overwrite parts of the existing constitution. For instance, the 13th Amendment, which banned slavery, superseded the Dred Scott decision that stated that the 5th Amendment prohibited the federal government from freeing slaves.
A constitutional amendment is a modification of a constitution that alters the text directly or is appended as a supplemental addition. Amendments are often woven into existing constitutions, directly changing the text. They can also be added as supplementary additions, changing the frame of government without altering the existing text. Most constitutions require that amendments be enacted through a special procedure, such as supermajorities in the legislature or direct approval by the electorate in a referendum.
A constitutional revision, on the other hand, is a fundamental and holistic change to a state's constitution. It differs from a constitutional amendment, which amends specific articles or sections. For example, Amendment A in South Dakota brought about far-reaching changes to the state's governmental plan, and was thus considered a revision.
Special amendment procedures are also required for certain types of changes, such as revising international borders, changing the form of government, or suspending citizens' rights. These procedures may include supermajorities in parliament, referendums, or special elections.
Amending the Constitution: Understanding the Process
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
In the case of the US Constitution, the newer amendment is generally considered to take precedence over the older one. However, it is the role of the judiciary and the courts, with the Supreme Court as the highest court, to interpret the law and decide how such conflicts should be resolved.
A theoretical example is if the US Supreme Court ruled that state bans on same-sex marriage violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, and then the US Constitution was amended to specifically ban same-sex marriage. In this case, the new amendment would be given effect as an exception to the old one due to its specificity.
In a 2016 op-ed, US law professor Erwin Chemerinsky argued that the unequal allocation of electoral college votes in the United States is unconstitutional as it conflicts with the equal protection principles found in the Fifth Amendment.
Amendments to a constitution can take the form of revisions to the previous text, directly altering the text, or they can be appended to the constitution as supplemental additions, changing the frame of government without altering the existing text. Most constitutions require that amendments be enacted through a special procedure, such as supermajorities in the legislature or direct approval by the electorate in a referendum.
