Hague and Harrop define a statute fundamental law. such as the American Constitution. as a individual papers that ‘sets out the formal construction of the province. stipulating the powers and establishments of cardinal authorities. and its relationship with other degrees. The Constitution established itself as ‘the supreme jurisprudence of the land. ’ In add-on. fundamental laws express the rights of citizens and in so making create bounds on authorities. ’ Ratified in 1789. the American Constitution still provides the basic regulations and establishes the basic institutional model for the American political system. In add-on. the Constitution protects the civil rights of citizens. David Barrows regards the ability of the Constitution to last clip as ‘extraordinary’ . particularly sing the ‘immigration from European states of extraordinary proportions … from states of wholly different societal and political order’ . In add-on. the Constitution has endured the most testing of times ; the close quadrupling of the original figure of provinces in the brotherhood ; the issue of bondage ; the Civil War and. the Great Depression. The Constitution’s strength is further emphasised by comparing to the Gallic fundamental law. which has been replaced 12 times in the same clip period.
The Constitution is the oldest life written fundamental law in the universe and has merely been officially amended 17 times in last 218 old ages. This essay will reason that the ‘extraordinary’ accomplishment of the Constitution to hold lasted so long and the words to hold changed so small is a consequence of several interconnected factors. The cumbrous amendment process and separation of powers has protected it from political motions. Its deficiency of length. comprehensiveness and deepness has limited the range of change. Furthermore. the Constitution is protected by its extremely symbolic nature. Furthermore. the Constitution is widely regarded as ‘perfect’ by Americans and as a consequence. it is unpopular for politicians to fiddle with it.
The belief in the strength of the Constitution’s basic institutional model is supported by cardinal American values ( economic prosperity and democracy ) and the success of the American state on the universe phase. Additionally. the Constitution derives strength from its vagueness in cardinal countries. leting for reading that has made it a flexible instrument to accommodate to altering fortunes.
The Establishing Fathers intended for the Constitution to last clip. David McKay argues this ‘was greatly aided by a cumbrous amendment process’ . which has protected it from politicians. The formal amendment procedure is laid out in Article 5 of the Constitution. of which there are two methods of proposal. Regardless of the method. any proposed amendment requires by confirmation from three-fourthss of the provinces. The first method is by a two-thirds bulk ballot of both Houses of Congress. which has been used for every amendment. The Constitution reads specifically ‘whenever two tierces of both Houses shall hold it necessary shall suggest amendments to this Constitution. ’ For the 2nd method. the Constitution provinces ‘on the application of the legislative assembly of two-thirds of the several provinces. shall name for a convention for suggesting amendments. ’
However. the province convention method has ne’er been successfully used in pattern. The difficultly of the amendment procedure is highlighted by the fact that in the last 218 old ages at that place have been over 5. 000 suggested amendments. although less than 1 % has really been submitted to the provinces and simply 17 amendments. Donald Lutz’s survey of fundamental laws shows that the Constitution is the 2nd most hard to amend in the universe. Barrows asserts that ‘it is undeniable that the Constitution of the United States is one of the most hard. possibly the most hard. organic structures of jurisprudence to change or amend. ’ In fact. it was extensively believed by political scientists from 1870 to 1913 that the Constitution was ‘beyond the effectual agencies of state to change or enlarge. ’
However. the ‘unalterable’ Constitution position was finally proved incorrect by the 17th amendment. The Constitution is non impossible to amend. but can merely be done so when there is overpowering support. Denenberg writes that the formal amendment procedure ‘although meagerly used. remains an of import piece of subsidiary equipment for overhauling the fundamental law when there is a clear consensus that alteration is necessary. ’ For illustration. the 13th ( Abolition of Slavery ) . 14th ( Citizenship. Due Process. Equal Protection ) . 15th ( The Right to Vote ) . 19th ( Women’s Rights to Vote ) . 24th ( Poll Tax Abolished ) and 26th ( Vote for 18-Year-Olds ) . The Fundamental law may hold been democratic at the clip of confirmation. but democratic values have amplified. By and large the formal amendments to the Constitution reflect the growing of democratic rules.
Undoubtedly. if the amendment procedure was less hard. so the Constitution would read well more otherwise than today. as there have been 1000s of proposed amendments and political motions that could non obtain the supermajorities ( e. g. Equal Rights Amendment – 1972 ) . The formal amendment process merely allows for amendments with overpowering support across the state. Phyllis Schlafly. of the conservative right and leader of the Eagle Forum/STOP ERA successfully lobbied provinces to neglect this proposed amendment. The cumbrous amendment process has protected the place of the Constitution as ‘supreme law’ and at the same clip allowed for necessary alteration.
The Establishing Fathers designed the Constitution to set up a authorities construction that avoided an over-powerful authorities. In add-on to separation of federal and province authorities. they created a separation of powers between the Executive ( Presidency ) . Legislative ( Congress ) and Judicial ( Supreme Court ) subdivisions of the federal authorities. whereby no individual can belong to more than one subdivision. Furthermore. there is an extended system of cheques and balances between each of the subdivisions of the federal authorities. largely written into the Constitution. The separation of powers. with cheques and balances make it is really hard for a individual group can rule. which has protected the Fundamental law from onslaught.
Madison was really wary of the inevitableness of cabals. composing in the tenth Federalist Paper that the ‘causes of cabal can non be removed. and that alleviation is merely to be sought in the agencies of commanding its effects. ’ The dispersion of power between federal and province degree and across the federal degree. in add-on to the cumbrous amendment procedure necessitating supermajorities has protected the original papers. Denenberg remarks that Madison was right in happening the balance between excessively much and excessively small alteration. The balance is a cardinal factor lending to the length of service of the Constitution.
A farther factor that has enhanced the ability of the Constitution to last clip is that it lacks deepness. comprehensiveness and length. The Fundamental law does non stipulate the minute inside informations of the political construction ; instead it ‘lays down general rules. ’ Mckay notes that the Constitution says ‘remarkably small about the precise powers of the chief institutions’ and does non stipulate how power sharing between the federal and province authoritiess should specifically work. Originally. the Fundamental law was merely 4. 300 words and its amended length stands a mere 7. 400 words. which is improbably short for constitutional criterions. By comparing. the Indian fundamental law has 95. 000 words. Donald Lutz’s survey of fundamental laws shows that shorter Constitutions. which specify less authorities maps are the least likely to be amended and vice-versa.
The grounds for this are that a long and elaborate fundamental law has ‘more targets’ for amendment. because ‘it trades with excessively many inside informations that are capable to alter. ’ Lutz compares the relationship between the length of a fundamental law and its amendment rate for the American province fundamental laws. reasoning that the relationship is ‘consistent’ with his theory. The transverse national informations supports an ‘even stronger’ decision about the relationship between the length of a fundamental law and its amendment rate. These features of the American Constitution are proved strengths in fundamental laws by and large. helping its ability to last clip.
The mode in which the Constitution is viewed by American’s has protected its position and deterred politicians from trying to fiddle with the holy text. Max Lerner famously wrote that the Constitution is our ‘totem and fetish’ which possess ‘supernatural powers’ . Clement Vose concurs that ‘American society became a fear for the Constitution’ . Vose likened the relationship between an American and the Constitution to a spiritual one. like a Christian and his Bible. William Hard radius of ‘the Constitution’s spirit. ’ The Constitution is a extremely regarded national symbol for Americans. enhanced by the fact that America is a peculiarly loyal state. The ‘pledge of allegiance’ is recited in school schoolrooms and public events throughout the state. In add-on to its symbolic nature. Mark Graber writes that ‘there is one affair about all Americans seem to hold … our Constitution is perfect. ’ Graber coins the term ‘perfect constitutionalism’ to depict the widespread feeling that the Constitution is ‘flawless’ . which underlies the belief of most Americans.
It is impossible for many American’s to believe that the Constitution has flaws. One merely has to look at the degree of fad caused by Beard’s ‘An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States’ . Brogan writes that Beard’s ‘critical probe of how this beneficent and about divinely divine papers was non encouraged. ’ Furthermore. there was a belief that Beard’s thesis cost him his occupation at Columbia. Kronman and Bickel assert that the authorization of the Constitution is grounded on ‘history and traditions’ .
The Constitution is the political heritage of American society. Bickel likened perfect constitutionalism to the conservative and hidebound theory of Burke. Clearly. the Fundamental law is more than merely a textual papers to Americans. Furthermore. Larry Bass has done several surveies on the Constitution as a symbol and concluded that it does ‘take on a personal significance to the person. ’ This factor is enhanced by the few amendments. which have fuelled the belief that the Constitution is perfect and enshrined it as ‘supreme law’ .
If America believed it could make a superior system of authorities. outside the restraint of the Constitution. so the Constitution would be replaced. Barber writes that in order the brand sense of the Constitution as the supreme jurisprudence. it ‘must represent our best construct of the good society. ’ In add-on. the American belief in the ‘perfect’ Constitution is non ungrounded. The basic system it established ( separation of powers. federalism. the independency of the bench and civil autonomies ) has been improbably yielded unbelievable consequences. It has provided the footing for the world’s dominant economic and military world power. since the Second World War. Hodder-Williams argues that ‘American politicians are content that the Constitution does put out appropriate rules for the administration of their state. ’
Furthermore. the Constitution has upheld the American values of democracy. capitalist economy. individuality. belongings and work ethic. Revisionist Charles Beard has disputed the motivations of the framers and argued that ‘fundamental theory of political economic system therefore stated by Madison was the footing … of the balance of powers. ’ Furthermore. that the logical thinking against a bulk was to forestall the minority belongings having category from onslaught. However. Beard alteration has been consistently decimated by review. The huge bulk of American’s believe the classical history. that their political and moral heritage from Montesquieu and Locke ; protecting single autonomy and upholding democracy. instead than supporting the rich. These Constitutional values are still held beloved.
A cardinal factor behind the length of service of the Constitution is the flexibleness factor. by agencies of expansive reading. Although the papers itself is extremely inflexible and stiff ( the ‘cumbersome’ the amendment procedure within a separation of powers ) it is a extremely obscure papers. The construction of authorities is stiffly expressed. but there are several vague or equivocal phrases. Beard argues that ‘important clauses … are non univocal bids of jurisprudence. ’ Denenberg concurs that ‘the fundamental law normally managed to be obscure in the right topographic points. ’ For illustration. phrases such as ‘interstate commerce’ . ‘general welfare’ . ‘equal protection’ . and ‘due procedure. ’ Importantly. the significance of the Constitution can and has been changed to germinate with society. outside of the formal amendment procedure and without disfiguring the holy papers.
Taking into consideration the trouble of the amendment procedure. symbolic importance of the Constitution to America and the demand to accommodate with clip. this factor is extremely of import. Had the all the moral and political values of the Establishing Fathers been entrenched in the Fundamental law to the last missive. so it would hold ‘probably been shattered long ago. ’ It has already been noted that increasing degrees of democracy have been incorporated by agencies of the formal amendment procedure. but reading has allowed developed outside of and preserved the words of holy papers.
Congress has played a function in the interpretative enlargement of the Constitution. Clause 18 in Section 8 of Constitution authorised Congress ‘to make all which shall be necessary and proper for transporting into executing of predating powers. ’ Denenberg comments that ‘never has so much been said in so few words. ’ This vague clause has authorised Congress’ expansive and flexible interpretative power. go throughing many of import statues that would otherwise hold had to be formal amendments. These include but are non limited to ; the Executive Reorganisation Act 1939 ; The Civil Rights Act 1964 ; The War Powers Act 1973 and. the Patriot Act 2001.
In add-on. there have been extra-constitutional developments in the signifier of Conventions. including political parties. the cabinet and congressional commissions. However. the controversial function the Judiciary in the reading of the Constitution has been more of import. Chief Justice Charles Evan Hughes famously said that “we are under a Constitution. but the Constitution is what the Judgess say it is. ”
The rule of judicial reappraisal is non mentioned explicitly in the Constitution. instead it is inferred. Kramer notes that ‘some of the Laminitiss embraced it. a few rejected it’ and ‘most had non even heard of it or did non give it much idea. ’ Judicial reappraisal was established in the Marbury V Madison instance 1803. It gives the Supreme Court the power to analyze the constitutionality of statute law and explain assorted subdivisions of the Constitution in respects of tribunal instances. The importance of judicial reappraisal has been magnified by figure of equivocal and obscure phrases in the Constitution. Graber notes that for the intents of reading ‘the text of Constitution has any significance at all’ . This is illustrated by several instances where the Supreme Court has overruled its ain old determinations.
The most celebrated illustration is Brown v Board of Education. Topeka 1954. which overruled the ‘separate but equal’ opinion that was antecedently justified under the 14th amendment in Plessy V Fergusson 1896. Justice Thurgood Marshall shows the Supreme Court’s switching intervention of black Americans: ‘they were enslaved by the jurisprudence. emancipated by jurisprudence. disenfranchised by jurisprudence ; and. eventually they have begun to win equality by law’ . ’ Other of import illustrations include ; Baker v Carr ; USA v Richard Nixon 1974 and. Bush V Gore 2000.
Donald Lutz’s survey supports this statement. as it shows that there is a cross-national tendency between a low amendment rate and constitutional length of service when there is ‘the usage of some surrogate agencies of alteration to supplement the formal amendment process’ . including ‘judicial reappraisal. ’ Furthermore. Hodder-Williams argues with virtue that ‘despite the minimum figure of amendments’ . due to interpretation the Constitution is an ‘astonishingly flexible instrument to cover with altering jobs and altering values. ’ The vagueness of the Constitution in cardinal topographic points has given it a dateless pertinence and made it able to accommodate to altering historical fortunes.
In decision. there are several interconnected factors for why the Fundamental law has lasted so long. Its deficiency of length. comprehensiveness and deepness has kept limited the possibilities for onslaught. The hard amendment procedure. in add-on to a dispersion of powers and widespread belief in the perfect papers has limited politicians from fiddling with it. However. the Fundamental law can and has been officially amended when its demands to be. Furthermore. cardinal vague and equivocal phrases. which have allowed for expansive reading.
Judicial reappraisal has been vitally of import in germinating the significance of the Constitution to run into the demands of a altering society. Congressional Acts of the Apostless and Conventions have developed following to the Constitution. without holding to be incorporated as formal amendments. The basic construction of the political system and protection of civil autonomies have kept in melody with cardinal values and brought enormous economic success. The Establishing Fathers have conceived a timeless chef-d’oeuvre that has survived and will go on to last the most testing of fortunes.
Bibliography
Barrows. David Prescott ( 1936 ) ‘The Constitution as an Component of Stability in American Life’ . Annalss of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Vol. 185. pp 1-10.
Bass. Larry ( 1979 ) ‘The Constitution as Symbol: The Interpersonal Sources of Meaning of a Secondary Symbol’ . American Journal of Political Science. Vol. 23. No. 1. pp. 101-120.
Beard. Charles ( 1965 ) An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States. London: Collier-MacMillan Limited.
Beard. Charles ( 1936 ) ‘The Populating Constitution’ . Annalss of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Vol. 185. pp. 29-34.
Brogan. D. W. ( 1965 ) ‘The Quarrel over Charles Austin Beard and the American Constitution’ . The Economic History Review. Vol. 18. No. 2. pp. 199-223.
Denenberg. R. V. ( 1976 ) Understanding American Politics. Glasgow: William
Collins Sons & A ; Co. Ltd.
Graber. Mark ( 1989 ) ‘Our ( Im ) Perfect Constitution. The Review of Politics. Vol. 51. No. 1. pp. 86-106.
Grant. Alan ( 1994 ) The American Political Process. 5th edition. Aldershot: Dartmouth Publishing Co. Ltd.
Hague. Rod and Harrop. Martin ( 2007 ) . Comparative Government and Politicss: An Introduction. 7th edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Hard. William ( 1936 ) ‘The Spirit of the Constitution’ . Annalss of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Vol. 185. pp. 11-15.
Hodder-Williams. Richard ( 2003 ) ‘The US Constitution’ . in Singh. Robert. Regulating America: the political relations of a divided democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 53 – 74.
Hodder-Williams. Richard ( 2003 ) ‘The federal judiciary’ . in Singh. Robert. Regulating America: the political relations of a divided democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 147-168.
Kramer. Larry ( 2004 ) ‘Understanding Marbury v. Madison’ . Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. Vol. 148. No. 1. pp. 14-26.
Lineberry. Robert. Edwards III. George and Wattenberg. Martin ( 1991 ) Government in America: Peoples. Politicss and Policy. 5th Edition. New York: Harper Collins.
Lutz. Donald ( 1994 ) ‘Towards a Theory of Constitutional Amendment’ . The American Political Science Review. Vol. 88. No. 2. pp. 355-370.
Madison. James ( 1787 ) ‘The 10thst Federalist Paper’ . hypertext transfer protocol: //www. fundamental law. org/fed/federa10. htm
McKay. David ( 2005 ) American Politics and Society. 6th edition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
hypertext transfer protocol: //c250. Columbia. edu/c250_celebrates/remarkable_columbians/charles_hughes. hypertext markup language
hypertext transfer protocol: //www. fundamental law. org
——————————————–
[ 2 ] . Hague. Rod and Harrop. Martin ( 2007 ) . Comparative Government and Politicss: An Introduction. 7th edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave. p. 260. [ 3 ] . Ibid.
[ 4 ] . Hodder-Williams. Richard ( 2003 ) ‘The US Constitution’ . in Singh. Robert. Regulating America: the political relations of a divided democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 53. [ 5 ] . Barrows. David Prescott ( 1936 ) ‘The Constitution as an Component of Stability in American Life’ . Annalss of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Vol. 185. p. 1. [ 6 ] . Lineberry. Robert. Edwards III. George and Wattenberg. Martin ( 1991 ) Government in America: Peoples. Politicss and Policy. 5th Edition. New York: Harper Collins. p. 78. [ 7 ] . McKay. David ( 2005 ) American Politics and Society. 6th edition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. p. 48. [ 8 ] . Ibid. p. 380.
