AssemblyBoard
November 01, 2024, 08:34:04 am *
The board has been closed to new content. It is available as a searchable archive only. This information will remain available indefinitely.

I can be reached at brian@tucker.name

For a repository of informational articles and current information on The Assembly, see http://www.geftakysassembly.com
 
   Home   Search  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
  Print  
Author Topic: Constitution Studying  (Read 26335 times)
Oscar
Guest


Email
« Reply #15 on: September 07, 2005, 10:49:44 am »

I thought I would bring it right to your doorstep, with no research needed on the part of any readers.  Smiley

Wouldn't you say that it is interesting reading?

Assuming, of course, that anyone is actually reading all of this.

Say, I wonder if this will be followed by an exposition of the wonders of Libertarianism.   Roll Eyes

Thomas Maddux
Logged
editor
Guest
« Reply #16 on: September 07, 2005, 10:56:39 am »

Assuming, of course, that anyone is actually reading all of this.

Say, I wonder if this will be followed by an exposition of the wonders of Libertarianism.   Roll Eyes

Thomas Maddux

I was worried that people would think it was me doing this.

It's not. 

If my word isn't good enough, then I'll make public who is doing it.

The point of all of it, I think, is pretty obvious.

Goodbye
Logged
hopon
Guest


Email
« Reply #17 on: September 07, 2005, 10:21:41 pm »

I think it's time for some lunchtime instruction to carry us through the rest of the day.

Article. VII.
The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.
done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,

GO WASHINGTON--Presidt. and deputy from Virginia

[Signed also by the deputies of twelve States.]

Delaware

Geo: Read
Gunning Bedford jun
John Dickinson
Richard Bassett
Jaco: Broom


Maryland

James MCHenry
Dan of ST ThoS. Jenifer
DanL Carroll.


Virginia

John Blair--
James Madison Jr.


North Carolina

WM Blount
RichD. Dobbs Spaight.
Hu Williamson


South Carolina

J. Rutledge
Charles 1ACotesworth Pinckney
Charles Pinckney
Pierce Butler.


Georgia

William Few
Abr Baldwin


New Hampshire

John Langdon
Nicholas Gilman


Massachusetts

Nathaniel Gorham
Rufus King


Connecticut
WM. SamL. Johnson
Roger Sherman


New York

Alexander Hamilton

New Jersey

Wil: Livingston
David Brearley.
WM. Paterson.
Jona: Dayton


Pennsylvania

B Franklin
Thomas Mifflin
RobT Morris
Geo. Clymer
ThoS. FitzSimons
Jared Ingersoll
James Wilson.
Gouv Morris


Attest William Jackson Secretary



Logged
hopon
Guest


Email
« Reply #18 on: September 07, 2005, 10:24:12 pm »

And we don't want to miss the all-important notes for this one.

NOTES

Note 1: This text of the Constitution follows the engrossed copy signed by Gen. Washington and the deputies from 12 States. The small superior figures preceding the paragraphs designate Clauses, and were not in the original and have no reference to footnotes.

The Constitution was adopted by a convention of the States on September 17, 1787, and was subsequently ratified by the several States, on the following dates: Delaware, December 7, 1787; Pennsylvania, December 12, 1787; New Jersey, December 18, 1787; Georgia, January 2, 1788; Connecticut, January 9, 1788; Massachusetts, February 6, 1788; Maryland, April 28, 1788; South Carolina, May 23, 1788; New Hampshire, June 21, 1788.

Ratification was completed on June 21, 1788.

The Constitution was subsequently ratified by Virginia, June 25, 1788; New York, July 26, 1788; North Carolina, November 21, 1789; Rhode Island, May 29, 1790; and Vermont, January 10, 1791.

In May 1785, a committee of Congress made a report recommending an alteration in the Articles of Confederation, but no action was taken on it, and it was left to the State Legislatures to proceed in the matter. In January 1786, the Legislature of Virginia passed a resolution providing for the appointment of five commissioners, who, or any three of them, should meet such commissioners as might be appointed in the other States of the Union, at a time and place to be agreed upon, to take into consideration the trade of the United States; to consider how far a uniform system in their commercial regulations may be necessary to their common interest and their permanent harmony; and to report to the several States such an act, relative to this great object, as, when ratified by them, will enable the United States in Congress effectually to provide for the same. The Virginia commissioners, after some correspondence, fixed the first Monday in September as the time, and the city of Annapolis as the place for the meeting, but only four other States were represented, viz: Delaware, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania; the commissioners appointed by Massachusetts, New Hampshire, North Carolina, and Rhode Island failed to attend. Under the circumstances of so partial a representation, the commissioners present agreed upon a report, (drawn by Mr. Hamilton, of New York,) expressing their unanimous conviction that it might essentially tend to advance the interests of the Union if the States by which they were respectively delegated would concur, and use their endeavors to procure the concurrence of the other States, in the appointment of commissioners to meet at Philadelphia on the Second Monday of May following, to take into consideration the situation of the United States; to devise such further provisions as should appear to them necessary to render the Constitution of the Federal Government adequate to the exigencies of the Union; and to report such an act for that purpose to the United States in Congress assembled as, when agreed to by them and afterwards confirmed by the Legislatures of every State, would effectually provide for the same.

Congress, on the 21st of February, 1787, adopted a resolution in favor of a convention, and the Legislatures of those States which had not already done so (with the exception of Rhode Island) promptly appointed delegates. On the 25th of May, seven States having convened, George Washington, of Virginia, was unanimously elected President, and the consideration of the proposed constitution was commenced. On the 17th of September, 1787, the Constitution as engrossed and agreed upon was signed by all the members present, except Mr. Gerry of Massachusetts, and Messrs. Mason and Randolph, of Virginia. The president of the convention transmitted it to Congress, with a resolution stating how the proposed Federal Government should be put in operation, and an explanatory letter. Congress, on the 28th of September, 1787, directed the Constitution so framed, with the resolutions and letter concerning the same, to "be transmitted to the several Legislatures in order to be submitted to a convention of delegates chosen in each State by the people thereof, in conformity to the resolves of the convention."

On the 4th of March, 1789, the day which had been fixed for commencing the operations of Government under the new Constitution, it had been ratified by the conventions chosen in each State to consider it, as follows: Delaware, December 7, 1787; Pennsylvania, December 12, 1787; New Jersey, December 18, 1787; Georgia, January 2, 1788; Connecticut, January 9, 1788; Massachusetts, February 6, 1788; Maryland, April 28, 1788; South Carolina, May 23, 1788; New Hampshire, June 21, 1788; Virginia, June 25, 1788; and New York, July 26, 1788.

The President informed Congress, on the 28th of January, 1790, that North Carolina had ratified the Constitution November 21, 1789; and he informed Congress on the 1st of June, 1790, that Rhode Island had ratified the Constitution May 29, 1790. Vermont, in convention, ratified the Constitution January 10, 1791, and was, by an act of Congress approved February 18, 1791, "received and admitted into this Union as a new and entire member of the United States."

Note 2: The part of this Clause relating to the mode of apportionment of representatives among the several States has been affected by Section 2 of amendment XIV, and as to taxes on incomes without apportionment by amendment XVI.

Note 3: This Clause has been affected by Clause 1 of amendment XVII.

Note 4: This Clause has been affected by Clause 2 of amendment XVIII.

Note 5: This Clause has been affected by amendment XX.

Note 6: This Clause has been affected by amendment XXVII.

Note 7: This Clause has been affected by amendment XVI.

Note 8: This Clause has been superseded by amendment XII.

Note 9: This Clause has been affected by amendment XXV.

Note 10: This Clause has been affected by amendment XI.

Note 11: This Clause has been affected by amendment XIII.

Note 12: The first ten amendments to the Constitution of the United States (and two others, one of which failed of ratification and the other which later became the 27th amendment) were proposed to the legislatures of the several States by the First Congress on September 25, 1789. The first ten amendments were ratified by the following States, and the notifications of ratification by the Governors thereof were successively communicated by the President to Congress: New Jersey, November 20, 1789; Maryland, December 19, 1789; North Carolina, December 22, 1789; South Carolina, January 19, 1790; New Hampshire, January 25, 1790; Delaware, January 28, 1790; New York, February 24, 1790; Pennsylvania, March 10, 1790; Rhode Island, June 7, 1790; Vermont, November 3, 1791; and Virginia, December 15, 1791.

Ratification was completed on December 15, 1791.

The amendments were subsequently ratified by the legislatures of Massachusetts, March 2, 1939; Georgia, March 18, 1939; and Connecticut, April 19, 1939.

Note 13: Only the 13th, 14th, 15th, and 16th articles of amendment had numbers assigned to them at the time of ratification.

Note 14: This sentence has been superseded by section 3 of amendment XX.

Note 15: See amendment XIX and section 1 of amendment XXVI.

Note 16: Repealed by section 1 of amendment XXI.

Logged
2ram
Guest
« Reply #19 on: September 07, 2005, 11:10:16 pm »

Ok hopon, I think I get to solve this riddle.  Lenore does long "textbook" type posts and you just figure you may as well share something that you find interesting too.  Am I warm?  Well, it is.  The text of the Constitution is actually more interesting to me than last Sunday's Sunday School lessons.  I don't care for warmed up oatmeal either.  It's so gooey. Tongue 

The length of posts in both is a problem for me, but this is no doubt your main point in providing such volume of text.  If there are no rules then everyone can just do whatever they want. Since L's posting is not a BIG CRIME then she can continue to post how she wants to the total disregard of the admonishment of several co-posters. 

Do I get the prize?   Cheesy

frank

Don't you think that's a bit too frank, frank?  You might hurt Lenore's feelings by calling her Sunday School lessons "warmed up oatmeal".  Try to tone it down OK.

2r
Logged
hopon
Guest


Email
« Reply #20 on: September 08, 2005, 05:26:14 am »

Constitutional Amendments
Amending the United States Constitution is no small task.

The Amendment Process

"Informal Amendment"

History behind the ratified Amendments

Ratification dates of the ratified Amendments

The Failed Amendments

Some Proposed Amendments
« Last Edit: September 08, 2005, 05:30:24 am by hopon » Logged
hopon
Guest


Email
« Reply #21 on: September 08, 2005, 05:28:56 am »

The Amendment Process

There are essentially two ways spelled out in the Constitution for how it can be amended. One has never been used.

The first method is for a bill to pass both halves of the legislature, by a two-thirds majority in each. Once the bill has passed both houses, it goes on to the states. This is the route taken by all current amendments. Because of some long outstanding amendments, such as the 27th, Congress will normally put a time limit (typically seven years) for the bill to be approved as an amendment (for example, see the 21st and 22nd).

The second method prescribed is for a Constitutional Convention to be called by two-thirds of the legislatures of the States, and for that Convention to propose one or more amendments. These amendments are then sent to the states to be approved by three-fourths of the legislatures or conventions. This route has never been taken, and there is discussion in political science circles about just how such a convention would be convened, and what kind of changes it would bring about.

Regardless of which of the two proposal routes is taken, the amendment must be approved by three-fourths of states. The amendment as passed may specify whether the bill must be passed by the state legislatures or by a state convention. See the Ratification Convention Page for a discussion of the make up of a convention. Amendments are sent to the legislatures of the states by default. Only one amendment, the 21st, specified a convention. In any case, passage by the legislature or convention is by simple majority.

It is interesting to note that at no point does the President have a role in the formal amendment process (though he would be free to make his opinion known). He cannot veto an amendment proposal, nor a ratification.

Logged
hopon
Guest


Email
« Reply #22 on: September 08, 2005, 01:47:05 pm »

Notes on the Amendments
Each Amendment to the Constitution came about for a reason - to overrule a Supreme Court decision, to force a societal change, or to revise the details of the Constitution.

The process for adopting an amendment is outlined elsewhere, as is the ratification history of each Amendment. A list of failed amendments is also available.

Logged
hopon
Guest


Email
« Reply #23 on: September 08, 2005, 01:50:42 pm »

The Bill of Rights
As noted on the Constitutional Convention Topic Page, several delegates to the convention refused to sign the newly drafted constitution because it did not include a bill of rights. Bills of rights were typically parts of the constitutions of the several states of the day (and today), placed there to ensure that certain rights were recognized by the government. Most of the delegates did not feel such a bill was necessary, and other may have been on the fence but were weary from the months of negotiations.

The lack of a bill of rights was one of the main arguments that Anti-Federalists used to try to convince the public to reject the Constitution. But the need for change was all too evident, and it was not rejected. However, some of the states sent suggestions for amendments to the Constitution to add an enumeration of certain rights. The ratification messages of the states included many varying suggestions, which the very first Congress took under consideration in its very first session.

Representative James Madison, who was so instrumental in the creation of the Constitution in the first place, drafted a bill of rights. Though he originally opposed the idea, by the time he ran for a seat in the House, he used the creation of a bill as part of his campaign. He introduced the bill into the House, which debated it at length and approved 17 articles of amendment. The Senate took up the bill and reduced the number to 12, by combining some and rejecting others. The House accepted the Senate's changes, voting on September 24th and 25th, 1789; twelve articles of amendment were sent to the states for ratification.

The first two articles were not accepted by enough states, but the last ten were. We know them today as Amendments 1 through 10. The second article was eventually ratified as the 27th Amendment. The first ten amendments, collectively known as the Bill of Rights, were ratified on December 15, 1791 (811 days). A photographic image of the badly-faded original Bill is available on this site.

Logged
hopon
Guest


Email
« Reply #24 on: September 08, 2005, 01:54:23 pm »

Amendment I - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Logged
hopon
Guest


Email
« Reply #25 on: September 08, 2005, 10:25:01 pm »

Amendment 1 - Freedom of religion, press

In my opinion, the single most important part of the Constitution. Some of the first colonists of the nation for which the Constitution was written had been seeking to escape religious persecution. The constitutions of several of the states prohibited public support of religion. And above all, the many varying sects of Christianity in America required that to be fair to all, there could be preference to none. It would have been discraceful for anyone to wish to leave the United States because of religious persecution. So they decided it best to keep the government out of religion. Now, this is not to say that the United States was not or is not a religious one. Religion plays a big role in the everyday life of Americans, then and now. But what they were striving for is tolerance... something I fear contemporary Americans are lacking.

As for the press, I think they regarded a free press as almost a fourth branch of government, constantly keeping tabs on the government's activities and actions. I'm not sure what they would think of today's tabloid papers and television; but this kind or trash is a small price to pay to ensure that any news organization can rest assured that it can report freely on the activities of the government. Many other organizations in other nations have to worry about toeing the state's line or be arrested. How objective do you think a reporter can be when his life could be ended because of a critical story?

Logged
hopon
Guest


Email
« Reply #26 on: September 08, 2005, 10:27:36 pm »

Amendment II - Right to bear arms. Ratified 12/15/1791.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
___________________________________________________________________________________

Infringe
infringe vb [Latin infringere] 1: violate, transgress 2: encroach, trespass Source: NMW

In the context of the Constitution, phrases like "shall not be infringed," "shall make no law," and "shall not be violated" sound pretty unbendable, but the Supreme Court has ruled that some laws can, in fact, encroach on these phrases. For example, though there is freedom of speech, you cannot slander someone; though you can own a pistol, you cannot own a nuclear weapon.

« Last Edit: September 08, 2005, 10:30:58 pm by hopon » Logged
hopon
Guest


Email
« Reply #27 on: September 08, 2005, 10:40:20 pm »

Very interesting information regarding the historical context of the Second Amendment and today's debate and a proposed amendment is found at the following address.

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_2nd.html#context
« Last Edit: September 08, 2005, 10:44:44 pm by hopon » Logged
hopon
Guest


Email
« Reply #28 on: September 09, 2005, 06:23:34 am »

Amendment III  - Quartering of soldiers. Ratified 12/15/1791.

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

« Last Edit: September 09, 2005, 06:28:40 am by hopon » Logged
hopon
Guest


Email
« Reply #29 on: September 09, 2005, 06:27:37 am »

Amendment 3 - Conditions for quarters for soldiers

According to the GPO, this is one of the least cited parts of the Constitution in federal case law. The only one the GPO does cite is an interesting case that is actually fairly recent (Engblom v. Carey [2nd Circuit Court]).

In 1982, a group of prison guards went on strike in New York. Some of these guards rented housing from the prison, in a building about a half mile from the prison. When the guards struck, the National Guard was activated by the Governor to take over for the guards. The quarters rented by the guards were used to house the soldiers. A pair of the prison guards sued the Governor and several other officials on the basis that the 3rd Amendment had been violated, and that they had been denied due process under the 14th Amendment. In state court, the claim was summarily dismissed.

On appeal and reappeal, the Circuit Court upheld the lower court's ruling, and found that the 3rd Amendment had not been violated for several reasons; primarily, they found that the rented apartments were not required to be used (unlike the apartment of, say, a building super), and that in no other way did the guards "own" the property the soldiers were housed in (this being a traditional test of whether someone's rights of property are being violated). On the question of due process, the Court had other opinions that you can research if you are interested.

Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!