Strict Constitutionalism: Who Believes In It?

The interpretation of the United States Constitution has long been a subject of debate, with two main opposing political parties developing in the country's early years: the Jeffersonian Republicans and the Federalists. The Jeffersonian Republicans, led by Thomas Jefferson, believed in strong state governments, limited central government, and a strict interpretation of the Constitution. They wanted to prevent future political leaders from abusing their power by interpreting the Constitution differently than it was written. On the other hand, the Federalists, including Alexander Hamilton, favoured a powerful central government with weaker state governments and a loose interpretation of the Constitution. This divide between strict and loose construction continues to influence modern-day politicians, government officials, and citizens, who must decide how to interpret the Constitution.

Explore related products

Constitutional Interpretation: Textual Meaning, Original Intent, and Judicial Review

$25.58 $37.99

Constitutional Ambiguity and the Interpretation of Presidential Power (American Jewish Society (Dis))

$35.95 $35.95

American Constitutional Interpretation (University Casebook Series)

$285

Constitutional Interpretation: The Basic Questions

$17 $31.49

A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law - New Edition (The University Center for Human Values Series)

$18.49 $19.95

Constitutional Interpretation: Powers of Government, Volume 1

$94.32 $163.95

Thomas Jefferson, the primary advocate of strict interpretation, believed states should govern themselves

Thomas Jefferson, the primary advocate of strict interpretation, believed that states should govern themselves. He was a staunch supporter of states' rights and limited central government. Jefferson's view on the Constitution was that it should be narrowly interpreted, with the federal government having limited powers.

Jefferson's beliefs about the Constitution were shaped by his experiences as the first secretary of state, vice president, leader of the first political opposition party, and the third president of the United States. In these roles, he sought to establish a federal government with limited powers. He was also a strong advocate for individual rights, including freedom of the press.

Jefferson's opinion on the constitutionality of a national bank is considered one of the definitive statements on the limited powers of the federal government. He believed that the necessary and proper clause allowed the government to do only what was absolutely necessary. In contrast to Alexander Hamilton, Jefferson opposed the idea of a national bank, arguing that the Constitution did not authorize the federal government to set one up.

Jefferson's principles were tested during his presidency. For example, he was willing to expand his narrow interpretation of the Constitution to purchase the Louisiana Territory from France. However, he remained consistent in his opposition to the importation of slaves and his view of the separation of church and state.

Jefferson's influence extended beyond his time as president. He paved the way for his political protégés, James Madison and James Monroe, to succeed him in the presidency. Madison shared Jefferson's belief in a strict interpretation of the Constitution.

Jeffersonian Republicans believed in strong state governments, a weak central government, and strict construction

Jeffersonian Republicans, also known as Democratic-Republicans, were a political group in the United States led by Thomas Jefferson. They were active from the 1790s to the 1820s and were one of the two dominant political movements during this period. The Jeffersonian Republicans believed in strong state governments, a weak central government, and strict construction.

Jefferson and his followers opposed the concentration of federal power, which they saw as a threat to individual liberty and states' rights. They were committed to American republicanism, which meant opposing elitism and corruption and insisting on virtue. They prioritized the "yeoman farmer", "planters", and the "plain folk" and believed that farmers made the best citizens. They were antagonistic towards the elitism of merchants, bankers, and manufacturers and distrusted factory work. They also opposed the support of the British Westminster system and favored France over Great Britain in foreign affairs due to their support during the American Revolution.

Jeffersonian Republicans believed in strict construction, which meant they favored a strict interpretation of the United States Constitution. They opposed the establishment of a national bank, the build-up of the army and navy, and the passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts. They were against the accumulation of national debt and national bonds and did not want the government to earn money from the people. Jefferson and his colleague Madison believed that the constitution did not authorize the federal government to set up a bank. They also lost their battle against Chief Justice John Marshall, a Federalist, who held that the Supreme Court could strike down laws passed by Congress.

Jeffersonian democracy was not a one-person operation but a significant political party with many local and state leaders and various factions. They did not always agree with each other or with Jefferson himself, who was accused of inconsistencies by his opponents. However, they shared a commitment to republicanism and feared the aristocratic tendencies of the Federalists. They believed in political equality and strict limits on the national government, seeing a strong centralized government as a threat to freedom.

Strict constructionists base their decisions on the direct text of the Constitution

Strict constructionism, or strict interpretation of the United States Constitution, is a legal philosophy that has existed for a long time in American history, dating back to just after the Constitution was written. Also known as originalism, it is the belief that the Constitution should be interpreted as it was in the late eighteenth century by its framers.

Thomas Jefferson and James Madison are two of the most famous proponents of strict constructionism. Jefferson, in particular, maintained this view because he did not want future political leaders to abuse their power by interpreting the Constitution differently from how it was written. He believed that states should govern themselves and that the federal government should not be able to tell people what religion to follow. The Jeffersonian Republicans, also known as anti-federalists, believed in strict adherence to the Constitution, strong state governments, and a weak central government.

In contrast, Alexander Hamilton and the Federalists advocated for a loose interpretation of the Constitution, a strong central government, and weaker state governments. They believed that the Constitution was a living document that should be interpreted to meet the needs of the time.

In modern times, Supreme Court Justices Hugo Black and Antonin Scalia are examples of strict constructionists, basing many of their rulings directly on the text of the Constitution.

Explore related products

The Challenge of Originalism: Theories of Constitutional Interpretation

$41.97 $53

We the People: A Progressive Reading of the Constitution for the Twenty-First Century

$9.99 $17.99

Words That Bind: Judicial Review And The Grounds Of Modern Constitutional Theory

$58.89 $61.99

How to Argue the Constitution with a Conservative

$7.99 $14.99

Original Meanings: Politics and Ideas in the Making of the Constitution

$17.05 $18.95

Using Systemic Integration to Interpret War Crimes at the International Criminal Court: From Vienna to Rome to Timbuktu (International Humanitarian Law Series, 74)

$212

Strict constructionists believe in the concept of originalism, interpreting the Constitution as it was in the late 18th century

Strict constructionism, or the strict interpretation of the United States Constitution, has existed since the time of Thomas Jefferson, one of the Founding Fathers of the United States. Jefferson maintained a strict constructionist view to prevent future political leaders from abusing their power by interpreting the Constitution differently from how it was originally written.

Strict constructionists base their decisions directly on the text of the Constitution and do not usually take into account historical findings. They believe in the concept of originalism, interpreting the Constitution as it was in the late 18th century when it was written. This is in contrast to loose constructionists, who believe that the Constitution is a living document that should be interpreted to meet the needs of the time and take into account scientific findings and historical evidence to provide the most modern ruling.

Strict constructionists believe that the Constitution restricts the powers of the federal government to those explicitly and clearly granted to it by the document. They argue that the federal government should not be able to tell people what religion to follow, showing their support for religious freedom. They also believe that the government cannot limit people's ability to write and speak their opinions freely, assemble, or petition for change under any circumstance.

Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, the primary author of the Constitution, believed in a strict interpretation of the Constitution, as did the Jeffersonian Republicans, the first opposition political party in the United States. They believed in strong state governments, a weak central government, and a strict construction of the Constitution.

Strict constructionism is a legal philosophy that limits federal government powers to those expressly granted by the Constitution

Strict constructionism, or original intent, is a legal philosophy that limits federal government powers to those expressly granted by the Constitution. It emphasizes a narrow, literal interpretation of the US Constitution, prioritizing the original intent of its framers. This theory contrasts with a loose construction of laws, which allows broader discretion by judges to determine intent in legal language.

The term "strict constructionism" is also used in American political discourse as an umbrella term for conservative legal philosophies, which tend to be more willing to strike down federal laws and regulations for exceeding authorized powers. The term began to be used by conservative politicians such as Richard Nixon in 1968 when he was running for election. He pledged to appoint justices who would interpret the law and reinstate "law and order" to the judiciary.

Many of the original framers of the Constitution were not strict constructionists; Washington, Hamilton, and Adams all took broad interpretations of the powers afforded to the federal government. An early attempt at limiting the federal government's powers to only those "expressly" granted by the Constitution was rejected at the constitutional convention, as many of the Founding Fathers did not originally intend for the Constitution to be read in this manner. However, some fathers not present at the convention, such as Thomas Jefferson, would later argue for a strict interpretation of federal powers. James Madison, the Constitution's primary author, took a more moderate view, somewhere between the interpretations promoted by Jefferson and Adams.

Jefferson, for example, argued against the constitutionality of a national bank, stating that the Constitution did not authorize the federal government to set one up. He also opposed the national debt and national bonds, not wanting the government to earn money off the people. He believed in state rights and a limited central government.

Frequently asked questions