Louisiana Purchase: Constitutional Conundrum

The Louisiana Purchase in 1803 was a land deal between the United States and France, in which the U.S. acquired approximately 827,000 square miles of land west of the Mississippi River for $15 million. This purchase doubled the size of the United States and was instantly popular with the American people. However, it posed a constitutional dilemma for President Thomas Jefferson, who had always advocated for a strict interpretation of the Constitution, which did not explicitly empower him to purchase territory. This purchase also raised questions about the balance of power between the North, South, and West regions of the country and set a precedent for future presidents to potentially ignore constitutional restraints.

Explore related products

The Constitutional History of the Louisiana Purchase, 1803-1812

$25.95

The Louisiana Purchase (Turning Points in History Book 2)

$9.67 $10.95

University of California Publications in History, April, 1920, Vol. X. The Constitutional History of the Louisiana Purchase, 1803-1812

$18.45

The Louisiana Purchase (Making a New Nation)

$9.99

Louisiana Purchase (Ready-for-Chapters)

$6.29 $6.99

A Wilderness So Immense: The Louisiana Purchase and the Destiny of America

$4.99 $21

Jefferson's hypocrisy

The Louisiana Purchase of 1803, which doubled the size of the United States, was a seminal moment for the new nation. However, it also posed a constitutional dilemma for President Thomas Jefferson, who had to grapple with the question of whether the acquisition was constitutional. This dilemma highlighted a certain hypocrisy in Jefferson's stance, given his well-known commitment to a strict interpretation of the Constitution.

Jefferson had a history of opposing policies that exceeded the powers granted by the Constitution or violated the limits set by the Bill of Rights. He took a strict, literal view of constitutional powers, believing that any action by the President or the Executive Branch must be explicitly spelled out in the Constitution. Specifically, he argued that the Constitution did not provide the United States with the power to acquire new territory. This interpretation put him at odds with the acquisition of Louisiana, as the ability to buy property from foreign governments was not among the powers listed in the Constitution.

Jefferson's initial response to this dilemma was to propose a constitutional amendment to specifically authorize the purchase. However, he ultimately abandoned this idea, choosing instead to prioritise the acquisition of Louisiana over strict adherence to the Constitution. In a letter to John Dickinson in 1803, Jefferson acknowledged the constitutional dilemma, writing, "The General Government has no powers but such as the Constitution gives it... An amendment of the Constitution seems necessary for this." Yet, he also revealed his intention to move forward with the deal regardless, stating, "In the meantime, we must ratify and pay our money, as we have treated, for a thing beyond the Constitution, and rely on the nation to sanction an act done for its great good, without its previous authority."

Jefferson's decision to proceed with the Louisiana Purchase despite its questionable constitutionality has been characterised as hypocritical, particularly by his Federalist rivals. They argued that he was compromising his principles to pursue a popular policy that would enhance his political prospects. Indeed, the purchase helped Jefferson secure a landslide victory in the 1804 election, demonstrating that most Americans focused on the benefits of acquiring Louisiana rather than the constitutional concerns.

In conclusion, while Jefferson's strict constructionist interpretation of the Constitution initially led him to recognise the Louisiana Purchase as a constitutional dilemma, his ultimate decision to prioritise the acquisition over strict adherence to the Constitution revealed a certain hypocrisy in his stance. This hypocrisy was not lost on his political opponents, who were quick to point out the contrast between his previous defence of the Constitution and his willingness to exceed its bounds for the sake of national expansion.

Federalist opposition

The Louisiana Purchase in 1803 was a land deal between the United States and France, in which the U.S. acquired approximately 827,000 square miles of land west of the Mississippi River for $15 million. The acquisition of this territory, which would eventually encompass 15 states, doubled the size of the United States.

However, the purchase was not without controversy, and it faced significant opposition from Federalists. The Federalists argued that the purchase was unconstitutional, as there was no provision in the Constitution empowering the President to acquire new territory. Jefferson, a strict constructionist, agreed that the Constitution did not explicitly grant the President the power to make such a purchase. He considered a constitutional amendment to be the only way to conclude the deal with France. However, he ultimately decided to ignore the legalistic interpretation of the Constitution due to the public support for the purchase and the obvious value of Louisiana to the future growth of the United States.

The Federalist opposition to the Louisiana Purchase was led by Jefferson's political rivals, who had previously advocated for the use of force to acquire New Orleans. They argued that the purchase was an "unconscionable bargain" that aided France in its designs against Great Britain. They also raised concerns about the cost of the purchase, which amounted to $15 million.

The Federalists' opposition to the Louisiana Purchase highlighted their own hypocrisy, as they had often interpreted the Constitution loosely to discover implied powers. However, they were eager to point out the apparent contradiction between Jefferson's strict constructionist views and his willingness to exceed constitutional bounds in the case of the Louisiana Purchase. Despite their opposition, the purchase was never questioned in court.

In conclusion, the Federalist opposition to the Louisiana Purchase was based on their interpretation of the Constitution and their political rivalry with Jefferson. They argued that the purchase was unconstitutional and hypocritical, but their objections did not ultimately prevent the treaty's ratification. The Louisiana Purchase remained a significant moment in American history, shaping the nation's future growth and expansion.

Lack of constitutional provision

The Louisiana Purchase in 1803 was a land deal between the United States and France, in which the U.S. acquired approximately 827,000 to 830,000 square miles of land west of the Mississippi River for $15 million. The purchase doubled the size of the United States and would eventually encompass 15 states.

The purchase, however, posed a constitutional dilemma for President Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson took a strict, literal view of constitutional powers, believing that specific powers reserved for the President and Executive Branch needed to be explicitly spelled out in the Constitution. The Constitution did not include the ability to buy property from foreign governments among these enumerated powers. This lack of constitutional provision for the purchase of foreign territory presented a significant challenge to Jefferson, who had always advocated for strict adherence to the letter of the Constitution.

Jefferson's political opponents, the Federalists, were quick to point out this discrepancy. They argued that the purchase exceeded the President's constitutional powers and set a dangerous precedent for future presidents to ignore the restraints imposed by the Constitution. Jefferson himself recognized this dilemma, understanding that his approval of the purchase treaty might be seen as hypocritical given his prominent role as a defender of the Constitution during the administrations of George Washington and John Adams.

To address this constitutional dilemma, Jefferson initially considered proposing a constitutional amendment to specifically authorize the purchase. However, he ultimately decided against it due to the public support for the purchase and the perceived value of Louisiana to the future growth of the United States. Jefferson chose to prioritize the practical benefits of the acquisition over the legalistic interpretation of the Constitution, forgoing the passage of a constitutional amendment to validate the purchase.

In conclusion, the Louisiana Purchase highlighted a lack of constitutional provision for the purchase of foreign territory by the President. This dilemma forced Jefferson to grapple with the tension between his strict constructionist interpretation of the Constitution and the practical considerations of expanding the nation's territory. While the purchase was never formally questioned in court, it nonetheless underscored the complexities and ambiguities inherent in constitutional interpretation and the exercise of presidential power.

Explore related products

The Louisiana Purchase: A History Just for Kids

$14.99 $14.99

The History of the Louisiana Purchase

$9.95 $14.95

The Louisiana Purchase and American Expansion, 1803–1898

$16.36 $53

Journal of the American Revolution 2021: Annual Volume

$31.21 $40

The Dilemma

$3.99

Darwin's Dilemma

$1.99

Public support

The Louisiana Purchase was a popular move among the American public, who focused on the benefits of the deal. The treaty with France doubled the size of the United States, adding 828,000 square miles of territory, and delayed the day when the rapidly growing nation would run out of land for agriculture. It also removed the threat of Napoleon Bonaparte's France, which had recently taken possession of the territory from Spain, and ensured the free flow of commerce along the Mississippi River.

The purchase was also a significant moment for the young American republic, confirming the national belief that things can continue to change in the ongoing experiment that is the USA. It was a bold power play by President Thomas Jefferson, who was taking a risk by exceeding his constitutional powers. Jefferson, a staunch Republican, was opposed to such sweeping centralised actions. He took a strict, literal view of constitutional powers, meaning that specific powers reserved for the President and Executive Branch needed to be spelled out in the Constitution. The ability to buy property from foreign governments was not among these powers listed in the Constitution.

Jefferson's political opponents, the Federalists, were eager to point this out. They argued that the purchase was unconstitutional and that the United States had the right to expand its territory by conquest or purchase, but neither the president nor Congress could incorporate this territory into the Union without the approval of all the states. They also objected to the price, claiming that paying $15 million for the land amounted to an "unconscionable bargain" and that the land was not worth the price.

Despite the constitutional dilemma and opposition from the Federalists, the Louisiana Purchase was never questioned in court. The Senate voted for ratification on October 20, 1803, with a vote of 24-7, and the treaty was signed on October 31, 1803. The public support for the purchase, combined with other factors such as Jefferson's elimination of internal taxes and reduction of the national debt, helped him secure a landslide victory in the 1804 election.

Jefferson's constitutional amendment

The Louisiana Purchase in 1803 doubled the size of the United States and was a seminal moment for the new nation. However, it posed a constitutional dilemma for President Thomas Jefferson, who had to compromise his principles for the purchase to go forward.

Jefferson took a strict, literal view of constitutional powers, believing that specific powers reserved for the President and Executive Branch needed to be explicitly spelled out in the Constitution. The ability to buy property from foreign governments was not among these powers listed in the Constitution, a fact that his political opponents, the Federalists, were quick to point out.

Jefferson initially considered a constitutional amendment as the only way to conclude the deal with France. He wrote to John Dickinson in 1803, expressing his belief that the government only had the powers granted to it by the Constitution and that an amendment was necessary to acquire and incorporate foreign territory into the Union. Jefferson saw his amendment as an addition to Article 4, Section 3 of the Constitution, which covered the creation of new states and territories. He proposed maintaining most of the purchased land as "Indian country" to facilitate the relocation of Native Americans east of the Mississippi River.

However, Jefferson faced opposition from his cabinet members, including James Madison, who disagreed about the need for an amendment. Jefferson also had to contend with a deadline to ratify the treaty, and he ultimately decided to send the treaty to Congress without an amendment. He rationalized his decision, comparing it to a guardian investing money for the good of their ward. Jefferson and his supporters worked to sell the deal to the Federalists, who had previously advocated for expanding federal powers, while the Republicans, Jefferson's own party, opposed such an extension of presidential powers.

The debate in the Senate lasted only two days, and on October 20, 1803, the Senate voted for ratification by a margin of 24-7. The treaty was signed on October 31, 1803, and while some Federalists continued to view the purchase as unconstitutional, it was never questioned in court. Jefferson later described the Louisiana Purchase as a "great achievement," and it helped him secure a landslide victory in the 1804 election.

Frequently asked questions