Select one amendment from the Bill of Rights and research why the Founding Fathers found it necessary to state it, and explain what had happened in England or Europe that brought about that amendment? Remember that we were a colony of England's for over one hundred years before the American Revolution. State the history of the amendment, why it is controversial today (if it is) and what your personal opinion about it is. Take a side in the controversy, but present both sides. You must have supporting evidence. Introduction: The Bill of Rights is the first ten amendments of the Constitution of the United States of America. They guarantee a certain number of individual liberties against the exercise of a tyrannical government. Among those amendments the most curious one is the ninth which states that "the enumeration, in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to denied or disparage others retained by the people."
[...] The ninth amendment: origins and controversy Select one amendment from the Bill of Rights and research why the Founding Fathers found it necessary to state it. What had happened in England/Europe that brought that amendment about? Remember that we were a colony of England's for over one hundred years before the American Revolution. Write the history of the amendment, why it is controversial today (if it is) and what your personal opinion is about it. Take a side in the controversy, but present both sides. [...]
[...] Lash explains: 7 Levy, Origins of the Bill of Rights Lash, Kurt T. Lost Original Meaning of the Ninth Amendment” in Texas Law Review, Dec2004, Vol Issue p331-465, 99p; (AN 15476490) The Libertarian and federalist readings of the Ninth Amendment have each received their share of criticism, both in terms of original understanding and contemporary application. Libertarian readings have been criticized for failing to fully appreciate the role federalism played in the enactment of the Bill of Rights, and federalist theories have been criticized for failing to fully appreciate the Founders' belief in natural rights.8 This double interpretation helped create a controversy. [...]
[...] So as long as those natural rights are not challenged, I do not see the point of stating them. But when it occurs that the government fails to protect those rights, or deliberately takes them from the people, the latter has to give its ascent or oppose the decision. When a new law that challenges one of the unenumerated rights is proposed, the ascent is given through representation in the Legislature, but if it proves detrimental enough for the people to sue the government, the Judiciary decides who this right eventually belongs to. [...]
[...] But the Federalists (among whom the most famous were James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay) were reluctant to write a Bill of Rights because they thought it would be dangerous. As proved namely by The Federalist, No they believed that specifying a right implied a power to violate it, and that an enumeration of rights would prevent people from having those not mentioned Also, as Deroy Murdock points out: 4 "The Federalist Papers/No. 84." Wikisource, The Free Library Jul Murdock, Deroy. [...]
[...] They did not expect the development of a judicial power that influenced public policies. They did not expect judicial activism whether conservative or liberal [emphasis mine]. Nor did they foresee political parties, administrative agencies, overwhelming executive domination of foreign policy, national governance of the economy, foreign policy - 5 - made without knowledge of any elected members of the government, or management of fiscal policies by the Federal Reserve Board Levy, Origins of the Bill of Rights Lash, Kurt T. [...]
Lecture en ligneet sans publicité !
Contenu vérifiépar notre comité de lecture