Adoption of U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights

Adoption of U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights

The Final Vote

Most of the delegates who attended the Constitutional Convention signed the new Constitution on September 17, 1787. George Mason was one of a few men present who did not sign the final draft because it did not include a list of protected liberties. Benjamin Franklin encouraged his colleagues to approve the new national constitution even though he did not agree entirely with it. James Madison recorded in his notes that James Wilson (PA) read Franklin’s speech to the convention.

Ben Franklin said:

“I confess that there are several parts of this constitution which I do not at present approve, but I am not sure I shall never approve them. I doubt too whether any other Convention we can obtain, may be able to make a better Constitution.

For when you assemble a number of men to have the advantage of their joint wisdom, you inevitably assemble with those men, all their prejudices, their passions, their errors of opinion, their local interest, and their selfish views. From such an assembly can a perfect production be expected?

It therefore astonishes me, Sir, to find this system approaching so near to perfection as it does. Thus I consent, Sir, to this Constitution because I expect no better, and because I am not sure, that it is not the best. The opinions I have had of its errors, I sacrifice to the public good.”
 (Madison 653-654)
.

Why did the delegates decide to have state ratifying conventions approve the new Constitution?

You may remember that when the Confederation Congress called the meeting in Philadelphia to revise the Articles of Confederation, it reminded the delegates that any changes or amendments proposed to the current national constitution would require the approval of all 13 state legislatures (as required under the Articles).

GET WRITING HELP HERE 

HUMAN-WRITTEN
AND
PLAGIARISM-FREE 

 

As you can imagine, it would be impossible to get all the states to approve the new national constitution. Rhode Island for starters. It did not even send delegates to the Federal Convention because it feared it would give the national government greater power to regulate commerce. As a result, the delegates required that nine ratifying conventions approve the new Constitution (see Article VII). This way they could by-pass the state legislatures and also have the new Constitution approved by the people!

Further, by allowing the people to approve the constitution would make it more rigorous. The people would apt to be more supportive of the new government if they had a role in approving it Adoption of U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.

After the U.S. Constitution was signed delegates who were Congressmen took the document to New York and presented it to the Confederation Congress. It forwarded the new Constitution to the state legislatures who called for elections to state ratifying conventions.

Why is it important to know about the Federalist Papers?

When Alexander Hamilton arrived back in New York, he asked several people to contribute articles describing problems governing under the Articles and why it was critical to replace the confederacy with a republican form of government.

James Madison and John Jay agreed to help try to persuade New Yorkers to support the new Constitution. Hamilton, Madison, and Jay wrote 85 essays under a false name, “Publius”-after a Roman military hero.

It is unclear how persuasive they were in convincing the New York delegates to vote in favor of ratification in July 1788, but 
The Federalist
 sometimes referred to as the Federalist Papers is one of the best sources we have on the reasons for establishing a federal republic with the people the source of power in our nation.

Today, the Supreme Court justices look to these essays to help them interpret the Constitution. Some of you may remember that during the Clinton impeachment proceedings, Congressmen went to their bookshelves to dig out a copy of the Federalist Papers! Hamilton wrote four essays about Congress’ role in the impeachment process.

Click on the link below to see the Federalists Papers:

The Federalist Papers

Why did supporters and opponents of the new Constitution both win at the end of the day?

The states engaged in long heated debates over the Constitution from late 1787 until July 1788. Delaware was the first to approve it on December 1787 and Rhode Island was the last state to do so in May 1790 (see Table 1-2, Ratification of the U.S. Constitution, for the timeline).

 

Why did it take so long for Rhode

Island to approve our current

Constitution?

 

Generally speaking, smaller states supported the new Constitution because they had equal voice in the new Senate and they saw greater economic benefits in being a part of larger union. Virginia and New York did not approve the new Constitution until mid-summer of 1788.

One of the strongest criticisms advanced by the Anti-federalists regarding the Constitution was that it lacked a national Bill of Rights that limited the power of our national leaders like the states’ constitutions which included a Bill of Rights limited the power of state officials. It was a powerful and very effective argument used against the supporters of the Constitution, the Federalists.

“The Promise-A national Bill of Rights”

James Madison told his fellow delegates at the Virginia ratifying convention that if they adopted the Constitution in its current form, he would draft amendments that included a Bill of Rights when he got elected to the U.S. House of Representatives. His promise helped to defuse the power of his anti-federalist opponents’ arguments, notably the passionate advocate of liberty, Patrick Henry Adoption of U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.

arguments presented by Federalists

and Anti-federalists?

 

In the spring of 1789, after a tough Congressional election against James Monroe, James Madison followed up immediately on his promise to include a national Bill of Rights. He talked with his fellow representatives regarding any changes they wanted made to the new Constitution, and he came up with 17 amendments. 
This is why James Madison is considered the “author” of the Bill of Rights.

Twelve amendments which included a list of protected liberties were approved by 2/3rd’s of the House and Senate and submitted to the state legislatures for their approval in October 1789. Only 10 amendments obtained the necessary support in the states. They are our 
Bill of Rights
 -e.g. freedom of religion, freedom of expression, right to assemble, and petition for redress of grievances, protection against unreasonable search and seizures, protection against self-incrimination, right to a public trial by jury in a federal criminal case, right to counsel, states reserved powers, etc. (
See the First Ten Amendments – the Bill of Rights
).

Click on the link below to go to the 
National Archives
‘s website and view 
America’s Historical Documents
. Click on the image of the 
Bill of Rights
:

America’s Historical Documents — Bill of Rights

To learn more about the Anti-Federalists, click on the links below:

George Mason s home, Gunston Hall

Patrick Henry s home, Redhill

Why didn’t the delegates include

a national Bill of Rights in our

Constitution in the first place?

 

How do you amend the U.S. Constitution?

The U.S. Constitution provides under Article V (5) that amendments or changes can be made by future generations to address their problems. It is not an easy process. Congress has proposed only 33 amendments and 27 amendments have been approved by states (most recently, the 27th Amendment that requires Congressmen to first stand for election before receiving their pay raise — Madison’s Congressional pay raise amendment).

Only Congress and the States play an official role in the amendment process. Once an amendment is proposed it is sent directly to the states for approval. The President does not have a formal role in this process. He cannot veto a proposed amendment. A President can try to influence Congress to support or oppose a resolution proposing an amendment like President Clinton’s efforts to defeat any efforts to pass a proposed Constitutional amendment to balance the budget.  Also, President G. W. Bush tried to influence the public on the proposed amendment to ban gay marriage. He officially supported an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that states that marriage is between a man and woman. However, he did support “civil unions.”

More recently, President Obama talked about the need to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court’s  2010 
Citizens United 
decision (prohibited limits on spending by corporations, unions, nonprofits, etc., in elections) by having states and Congress place “reasonable limitation” on raising and spending funds in elections. During his presidency, this proposed amendment failed to get the necessary super majority support in the U.S. Senate even with all the Democrats support of this idea (Prokop, Andrew. 
“
President Obama: I’d love a constitutional amendment to reverse Citizens United
,”).
 

In 2014, this Democratic propose Constitutional amendment was blocked in the U.S. Senate by a Republican led filibuster.  It was reintroduced in 2019 in the U.S. House and U.S. Senate by Congressman Schiff (D-CA) and Senator Tom Udall (D-NM) (Carney, Jordain. “
Democrats introduce constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United
“).

As you are aware,the 
Citizen United
 decision raised the issue of whether Congress can limit corporations, unions, and nonprofit corporations spending on behalf or opposed to political candidates during an elections. Did it violate the First Amendment Freedom of Expression–“political speech?”  Also, it raised the question of whether a corporation is a “person.” It also contributed to the rise of “Super PACs” used by wealthy individuals and fewer than anticipated corporations raise and spend dollars to support their candidates and oppose others. What are your thoughts?

To learn more about this proposed amendment 
go to 
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
,
 January 21, 2010,  and at History.com editors, 
Citizens United vs. FEC
,

Article V provides for two methods used to propose a Constitutional amendment:

The Congress-2/3rd’s vote in U.S. House and 2/3rd’s vote in the U.S. Senate (traditional route).

2/3rd’s state legislatures can petition Congress to call for a convention to propose an amendment (s)-never been done.

Under the Constitution, the Congress can decide who will approve the proposed amendment. It can choose 3/4th’s of state legislatures or 3/4th’s of state ratifying conventions to approve a proposed amendment. (All proposed amendments have been approved by state legislatures except the 21st Amendment that repealed prohibition).

What happened to the federal

amendment banning gay marriage?

Did it die?

 

 

What do you think?

Do you support the proposed federal Constitutional Amendment prohibiting flag burning? In 1989, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Texas law banning flag burning as a violation of First Amendment freedom of speech-symbolic speech (Texas v. Johnson). The act of burning the flag was used as a form of political protest. This is an example of using the Amendment process to overturn decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court (a check on the Court).

On June 27, 2006, the U.S. Senate failed to pass a proposed Constitutional amendment banning flag burning by one (1) vote (66-34). It needed 2/3rd’s supermajority for passage (67 votes). Last year the U.S. House of Representatives passed this amendment by 2/3rd’s vote (286-130).

If you are interested in learning more about this federal Amendment, please see 
Congress — Legislative Information on the Internet
 and click on 
109th Congress
(Congress has considered this Amendment in past Congresses, but it has not achieved the super majority in both Houses to be sent to the States). Adoption of U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights