| |
OluwafemiMorohunfola-FirstPaper 4 - 19 Feb 2008 - Main.OluwafemiMorohunfola
|
|
META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper%25" |
| | Federalism as originally envisioned | |
< < | Under the Articles of Confederation, state sovereignty was a crucial concern and a weak federal government was seen as a good protection of the states. However, under the Articles, the federal government was too weak to deal with national problems. An inability to collect taxes and pay revolutionary war debts created economic crises and violent uprisings like Shay’s Rebellion. | > > | Under the Articles of Confederation, state sovereignty was a crucial concern and a weak federal government was seen as a good protection of the states. However, under the Articles, the federal government was too weak to deal with national problems. An inability to collect taxes and pay revolutionary war debts created economic crises and violent uprisings like Shay’s Rebellion. | | | |
< < | Even though states saw a need for stronger federal government, they were hesitant to give up any power or sovereignty. The Tenth Amendment of the United States constitution, in reserving all unspecified powers for the states, created a compromise that the states could handle; A federal government of enumerated powers and states with almost unlimited powers. In the Federalist Papers, Federalism was described as the key to checks and balances and to protecting state sovereignty and civil liberties. From the beginning, the Constitution and its framers made it clear that Federalism was to be a key aspect of the newly created union hereafter. | > > | Even though states saw a need for stronger federal government, they were hesitant to give up any power or sovereignty. The Tenth Amendment of the United States constitution, in reserving all unspecified powers for the states, created a compromise that the states could handle; A federal government of enumerated powers and states with almost unlimited powers. In the Federalist Papers, Federalism was described as the key to checks and balances and to protecting state sovereignty and civil liberties. From the beginning, the Constitution and its framers made it clear that Federalism was to be a key aspect of the newly created union hereafter. | | Transitions to the Modern system | |
< < | Contemporary America is not the country that the framers intended to create, and the collapse of modern Federalism is a primary example of that fact. In Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court held that it was their job to determine what the constitution says. The Supreme Court, as a part of the federal government, was never in an objective position to strike a balance between federal powers and state powers. It demonstrated that early on, in McCulloch? v. Maryland, by asserting that the Necessary and Proper clause gives the federal government an indeterminate number of implied powers. For Federalism, this was the beginning of the end. | > > | Contemporary America is not the country that the framers intended to create, and the collapse of modern Federalism is a primary example of that fact. In Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court held that it was their job to determine what the constitution says. The Supreme Court, as a part of the federal government, was never in an objective position to strike a balance between federal powers and state powers. It demonstrated that early on, in McCulloch v. Maryland, by asserting that the Necessary and Proper clause gives the federal government an indeterminate number of implied powers. For Federalism, this was the beginning of the end. | | A massive attempt to protect the conception of state sovereignty occurred in the American Civil War, but those protecting united federal control were victorious. When Lincoln said, “A house divided against itself cannot stand,” he was asserting the need for a powerful federal government with few limitations. Franklin D. Roosevelt affirmed the same need with the New Deal, feeling that national economic solutions would be needed to combat a national economic crisis. In West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish, the Supreme Court began summarily affirming New Deal legislation as constitutional under the commerce clause. Many modern cases have affirmed that much deference will be given to the federal government in determining what its powers are. As a final blow to the judicially enforced concept of federalism, in Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority, the Supreme Court implied that political checks might be the only real protection of traditional areas of state control. |
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors. All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| |