Malcolm Rivera
The ratification of the US Constitution was a critical juncture in American history, establishing a federal government with more specific powers and a stronger, more centralized government. The process was contentious and hard-fought, with Federalists and Anti-Federalists engaging in public debates, newspaper articles, and pamphlets to sway public opinion. The Constitution's ratification was not a given, and it was only after nearly a year of deliberation that it was narrowly ratified by the necessary number of states in 1789, setting the course for the nation's future and becoming the law of the land.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| The Constitution's authority came from representatives of the people | The state conventions served as forums for proponents and opponents to articulate their ideas before the citizenry |
| Avoided amendments from states | By bypassing debate in the state legislatures, the Constitution avoided amendments from states that were unwilling to yield authority to a national government |
| Allowed for public scrutiny and debate | The document was laid before the United States in Congress assembled and had to withstand public scrutiny and debate |
| Established a federal government with more specific powers | The Constitution established a federal government with more specific powers, including those related to conducting relations with foreign governments |
| Established a more centralized government | Future stability required a stronger, more centralized government |
| Established a bill of rights | The Constitution included a bill of rights that protected rights such as freedom of speech, religion, and the press |
| Established the machinery of state | After the ratification of the Constitution in 1789, the machinery of state had been designed, but not yet tested and put to use |
Explore related products
![Ratification of the Twenty-First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States [1938]: State Convention Records and Laws](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71KMq9r2YgL._AC_UY218_.jpg)
What You'll Learn
The Constitution's authority came from the people
The ratification of the Constitution was a long and arduous process, and its passage was not inevitable. The Constitution was produced in secrecy during the Philadelphia Convention, and before it could become the law of the land, it had to withstand public scrutiny and debate. Able, articulate men used newspapers, pamphlets, and public meetings to debate ratification, with some arguing that the delegates in Philadelphia had exceeded their authority by replacing the Articles of Confederation with an illegal new document. They also argued that the delegates only represented the interests of the well-born and the propertied classes.
The state ratifying conventions served the function of informing the public of the provisions of the proposed new government and served as forums for proponents and opponents to articulate their ideas. Significantly, state conventions, not Congress, were the agents of ratification, which ensured that the Constitution's authority came from representatives of the people specifically elected to approve or disapprove of the charter. This resulted in a more accurate reflection of the will of the electorate.
The Constitution was not ratified by all states until May 29, 1790, when Rhode Island approved the document. The Bill of Rights, inspired by the English Bill of Rights of 1689, was ratified on December 15, 1791. The preamble to the Constitution, which begins with "We the People of the United States", sets out the aspirations and intentions of the framers and the purpose of the document, which is to "form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity".
True Wealth in East of Eden: Beyond Material Possessions
You may want to see also
The Constitution was not inevitable
The Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, lobbied for votes in favor of ratification, producing "The Federalist Papers" to explain and defend the proposed new government. The process of ratification was a messy and contentious one, with public debates and compromises necessary to address the clashing interests of the small and large states, and the slave and free states. The compromises made during the Constitutional Convention deprived the Constitution of internal coherence and showed that it was a product of negotiation rather than dispassionate political philosophy.
The ratification of the Constitution was a state-by-state process, with each state convention serving as a forum for proponents and opponents to articulate their ideas. The Constitution was not ratified by all states until May 29, 1790, when Rhode Island finally approved the document. The Bill of Rights, born out of the Massachusetts Compromise, was not ratified until December 15, 1791. The process of ratification was a delicate balance of interests and a reflection of the will of the electorate, with the authority of the Constitution coming from representatives of the people specifically elected for the purpose of approving or disapproving the charter.
The ratification of the Constitution was a significant moment in American history, establishing a framework for the government of the United States and setting the stage for the first federal elections. However, it is important to recognize that the Constitution's passage was not inevitable and that it was the result of contentious debates, compromises, and a long process of ratification by the states.
CPA Firm Policies: Ethical or Discreditable?
You may want to see also
The Constitution's impact on individual rights
The Constitution of the United States of America was approved by a majority of delegates to the Constitutional Convention on September 17, 1787. The document was laid before the United States in Congress assembled three days later, on September 20. However, ratification was not a straightforward process. The Constitution had to withstand public scrutiny and debate, and several states opposed it on the grounds that it did not adequately protect individual rights.
Other rights protected by the Constitution include the right to marry, which the Supreme Court has interpreted as a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and the right to be free from discrimination based on sex, as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
The Ninth Amendment states that the listing of specific rights in the Constitution does not exclude other rights not explicitly mentioned. This amendment ensures that individuals retain certain rights even if they are not expressly enumerated in the Constitution. The Tenth Amendment further limits the power of the federal government by stating that it only has those powers delegated to it by the Constitution.
The Constitution's ratification was a crucial step in establishing a federal system with a national government composed of three separate powers and reserved and concurrent powers of states. The process of ratification involved informing the public of the proposed new government and allowing proponents and opponents to articulate their ideas. The Constitution's authority ultimately derived from representatives of the people specifically elected to approve or disapprove of the charter.
Protestant Signers of the Constitution: How Many?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The Constitution's impact on foreign relations
The U.S. Constitution outlines the division of powers and the roles of the executive, legislative, and judiciary branches of the government in matters of foreign relations.
The executive branch, led by the President, is responsible for conducting foreign relations and has the power to receive ambassadors and other public ministers. The President is the "only channel of communication between the United States and foreign nations," and foreign nations are to consider the President's communications as "the expression of the nation." The executive branch has the exclusive authority to recognize foreign sovereigns and their territorial bounds, as affirmed by the Supreme Court in Zivotofsky v. Kerry.
The legislative branch, or Congress, also has a role in foreign relations. While the executive branch can establish the antecedent state of things, the legislative branch is free to perform its duties according to its own judgment. Congress can legislate on matters preceding and following a presidential act of recognition, which may include policies that undercut the executive's actions. In the case of recognizing new states, such as the Spanish-American republics, the President has invoked the judgment and cooperation of Congress, and they have worked together to appoint ministers.
The judiciary branch, or the Supreme Court, also plays a role in interpreting and upholding the Constitution in matters of foreign relations. In the Zivotofsky v. Kerry case, the Supreme Court affirmed the executive's exclusive authority in recognizing foreign sovereigns.
Constitutional Constraints: Impact on Business and Commerce
You may want to see also
The Constitution's impact on state vs federal power
The US Constitution, ratified in 1787, replaced the Articles of Confederation, which had been in effect since 1776. The Articles of Confederation had granted much power to the 13 states and very little to Congress, resulting in an ineffective national government and conflict among states. The Constitution, therefore, sought to establish a unified national government with more power than the states.
The Constitution embodies the concept of federalism, which refers to the division and sharing of power between the national and state governments. The Framers of the Constitution sought to establish a unified national government with limited powers, while maintaining a distinct sphere of autonomy for state governments to exercise their powers. This was achieved by enumerating the powers of the federal government and leaving the rest to the states.
The Tenth Amendment, for example, states that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." This amendment protects state power by limiting the ability of the federal government to act. Similarly, the powers of the federal government extend only to those that are necessary and proper for carrying into execution the powers vested in the Constitution.
However, the Supremacy Clause in Article VI of the Constitution establishes federal law as superior to state law. This has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to allow for federal preemption over state law, as seen in the case of McCulloch v. Maryland.
Despite the establishment of the Constitution, power struggles between the federal and state governments have continued throughout US history. For example, in recent years, immigration and the drug trade have become common battlegrounds for state vs. federal powers. The Constitution gives the federal government the power to regulate immigration and the drug trade, but states often push back and claim their own authority in these areas.
Constitutional Conundrum: Balancing Power and Liberty
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The ratification of the Constitution was important because it established a federal government with more specific powers, including those related to conducting relations with foreign governments.
The procedure for ratifying the Constitution was critical. The Articles of Confederation required the unanimous approval of state legislatures, which had previously proven impossible. To overcome this, the ratification of nine out of thirteen states was deemed sufficient.
The Constitutional Convention met between May and September 1787. The first state to ratify was Delaware on December 7, 1787, and the Constitution was ratified by the necessary nine states by June 21, 1788. The Bill of Rights was ratified on December 15, 1791.
There were several objections to the ratification of the Constitution, including that the delegates had exceeded their authority by creating a new form of government, that it served the interests of the propertied classes, and that it gave too much power to the central government.
