The Debate Over Ratification
Federalists vs. Antifederalists
Federalists: support the federal union and ratification of the new constitution.
- Leading Federalists: James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay (write the Federalist Papers to argue in favor of the ratification of the US Constitution).
- Much more organized than Antifederalists.
- Made up of merchants, businessmen, large property owners, lawyers, judges (generally, people that will benefit from a stronger national union).
Antifederalists: against the new constitution which they saw as aristocratic.
- Favored a small republic, a government that was close to the people, and one that promoted popular participation.
- States were seen as the government that best protects the rights of the people and carries out the primary business of government.
- The national government exists to give the states an external strength none of them could manage on their own.
- Leading Antifederalists: George Clinton, Patrick Henry, Richard Henry Lee, George Mason. Included farmers, rural artisans, laborers, shopkeepers (localists).
Antifederalists push for the inclusion of a bill of rights. Which is added to the Constitution as the first 10 amendments.
All 13 states vote to ratify. In some states, the vote is close, in others it is a landslide.
The Federal Government Launches
In the Election of 1788, the Electoral College chose 57 year old George Washington as the first president and John Adams as the first Vice President.
In 1789, Congress created the Departments of State, Treasury, War, and the Office of the Attorney General.
Washington chose Thomas Jefferson to be the Secretary of State, Alexander Hamilton to be the Secretary of the Treasury, and Henry Knox as the Secretary of War, and Edmund Randolph as Attorney General.
Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1789, establishing the federal court system with district courts in each state, 3 circuit courts to hear appeals, and a Supreme Court.
By 1791, the Bill of Rights was passed.
First Amendment
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” - Establishment Clause - no official religion, creates a separation between church and state, government cannot support or promote any particular religion, nor can they outlaw anything on the basis of religion.
“or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” - Free Exercise Clause - Includes the allowance for almost all religious practices, with a few exceptions (like human sacrifice), within a school setting, this includes the allowance for students to pray individually and make religiously-based clubs, but no full-school prayers
“or abridging the freedom of speech” - Very broad, can be applicable to internet use, and for symbolism like wearing a symbol for a belief or a symbolic action. For example in the case Texas v. Johnson (1989) the Supreme Court upheld the right to burn the American flag. This includes the right to stay silent. Some limitations can occur during wartime. This is only applicable to Congressional laws; private organizations (like social media) can censor. Limitations: Slander (knowingly telling lies intended to hurt a person’s reputation), true threats to do crime, misleading advertising. Historic limitations: Speech that presents a clear and present danger (yelling fire in a theater), Schenck v. United States (1919). Current limitation: the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless it will or is likely to produce imminent lawless action - Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969). In school, First Amendment rights apply to the point in which it does not interfere with the learning process - Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)
Freedom of the Press - The right to report and share information, especially about the government. Limitations - libel (slander in written form)
Freedom of peaceful assembly - Right to hold meetings without government interference - Public can use the streets to protest - Limits: riots and attempts to overthrow the government
To petition the government - government cannot purposefully keep your petition from being heard
Second Amendment - Right to Bear Arms
Reads that state governments can have militia and individuals can bear arms. Two interpretations: the rights are separate (states can have militias and individuals have the right to bear arms) or the rights are linked (the right to bear arms as part of a militia). In D.C v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court decided that individuals have a right to own legal weapons for lawful personal defense unconnected to service in a militia. Limitations: age, type of gun, and background (certain people can’t get guns), permits, waiting (cooling off) period.
Third Amendment - No Quartering of Troops in Private Homes
No forced quartering of soldiers, Reaction to the British Quartering Acts, Limitations - time of war or rebellion