Professional Documents
Culture Documents
HIST 592
Constitutional Principles
7/9/2015
The seminar I attended focused on the principles of the United States Constitution.
Rather than sifting through the specific operations of the branches of government and how they
were institutionally designed at the Constitutional Convention, the professors included a rich
series of readings and discussions that presented the theories behind republicanism, as well as the
evolving contentions. This tension creates a controversy in American history that students are
rarely exposed to and minimally provided the opportunity to analyze. There are a host of reasons
language of the text, and state standardsbut this particular seminar demonstrated how to
organize these principles through the initial debates of the Federalists, and how the tension is
continuously stretched or loosened through the context of particular time periods. Therefore, the
following narrative discusses the content that was learned, what it means for my students, and
how I can use it to further strengthen students understanding of Constitutional principles and
Conventionally, students are taught about the founding era as a triumph over an
oppressive regime; where this victory led to a free government of this people. Little emphasis is
republicanism, and disagreed over the scope and limits of the Federal government. It is during
this founding era where fundamental questions arose over how to ensure liberty and prevent
tyranny. Thus the Founders believed that they formed a republican government that, if preserved
1
properly, would be a leading light for the world that doubted this political theory. Ultimately, the
seminar over Constitutional Principles enhanced my understanding of the Founders theories, one
being the delegated powers theory, the formation of a republican government, contentions over
what is necessary to effectuate the enumerated powers, and the scope and limits of the Judicial
Branch. The narrative and analysis provided by Professor George, Professor Franck, and
understanding that the Founders facilitated the republican experiment for the purpose of
preserving liberty, but that they had little agreement over how the Constitution defined specific
powers. Therefore, the knowledge gained from this seminar will allow me to better shape
students understandings over the passions and characteristics of each branch, how and why they
examines and controls variables that hold potential for bringing about its demise.
The first challenge presented to the foundersas discussed in the first lecture and set of
readingsconsidered how they would design a regime that was distinct from the former. They
knew that with the failures of the Articles of Confederation that they needed to find a republican
form of government that was plausible and viewed as desirable, in order to preserve liberty. With
that, Professor George deepened my understanding of the intentions behind the United States
Constitutional Principles that were developed by the designed framework. The discussion of
Federalists 1 and 10 presents why, in the words of Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, the
republican form of government was necessary, as it limited factionalization and presented a form
of republicanism that was different that previous designs. With this, the use of Federalist 1 and
10 within the classroom would provide students with a deep understanding of the reasons behind
2
our Constitutional Principles, as they adequately demonstrate how the Founders desired a
republican form of government that would successfully preserve liberty and prevent tyranny.
Professor George further explained the intentions behind the delegated power theory in
regards to Founders desire to shift general jurisdiction from the central government to the states.
This meant that they designed a set of enumerated power for the central government, as they are
outlined in Articles I-III. Therefore, this necessitates the need to guide students towards
understanding that this shift of general jurisdiction, as well as the enumerated powers, was the
method by which the Founders hoped to preserve liberty and prevent tyranny. In other words,
when analyzing the delegated powers theory, students would further understand that the states,
whom are most accountable to the people, are to uphold health, safety, and morals.
Complexity ensues, however, as students are faced with the lines of separation between
enumerated powers and the powers of the states, as the states powers are not clearly defined;
rather, it is expressed that states are permitted unless explicitly forbidden. Therefore, the use of
the court case McCulloch v. Maryland is illustrative of how the lines of divisions between the
enumerated powers of the federal government and the reserved powers for the states are not
sharp. I would use my understanding of the reasoning behind the charter of the First National
Bank and the implications of the necessary and proper clause to further students understanding
of these blurred divisions. The takeaway from the first session and set of readings is that the
Founders worked to protect liberty and prevent tyranny by dividing and limiting the power of the
government. Discussions surrounding this principle require that students understand the
reasoning and concerns with the Bill of Rights, the contentions over the commerce power, and
3
Professor Franck further expanded upon the ideas of federalism through the separation of
powers of the Legislative and Executive Branches by simply presenting the question, why are
they there? Although my students can quickly identify the enumerated powers of each branch,
they find difficulty in analyzing why the powers are separated in the way that they are, and how
this separation of powers impacts the operations and debates of the United States government.
The Federalists use Federalist essays 47- 51 to embark on a narrative mark of the institutional
structure of the new Constitution. These essays present the structural purpose of the separation of
powers. When learning about how the Federalists intended to separate the powers, their rationale,
and the institutional structure that is presented in the Constitution, great importance lies in
allowing students to analyze the impacts of the Federalists explanations, and the purpose for the
separations of powers. For example, Professor Franck explained that, as liberty is the order of the
Constitution, the separation of powers within the branches was animated by the impulse to limit
the passions of members of the government. He further explained that the presentation of these
separations informs the public, thus corresponding with the theory of the rule of law.
The separation of legislating, effectuating, and judging the laws presents students with
the notion of establishing laws so that public knows how they are governed. However, it is
necessary for students to understand that the powers are not absolutely separated; rather they are
blended, for the purpose of preserving liberty. Reason being, James Madison, as presented in
Federalist 47, believed that placing the sole law-making authority, without a check, upon one
branch would lead to legislative tyranny. This particular idea is demonstrated with the Presidents
power to veto, as a veto is a legislative duty that is entrusted to the Executive Branch. This
particular power of the President, as well as the scope of checks and balances, presents students
4
with the Founders desires to create an equilibrium of powers where and overreach by any
government, the separation of powers, and checks and balances. Mansfields argument presents
the case that the Federalists saw the separation of powers, limited government, and checks and
integral piece of sustaining the success of the republican experiment. This success, as presented
legislators. For example, the theory behind the separation of power is what led to our bi-cameral
legislature. Students typically understand the functions of the bi-cameral legislature, but in order
for them to fully analyze the process, they must understand the reasoning behind this particular
structure.
Therefore, this seminar enhanced the ability to convey to students the fragmented and
diverse characteristics of the House of Representatives, as well as the how the Senate is viewed
as more elite and having a national outlook due to their larger constituencies. These particular
distinctions allow students to further analyze the structures of the bi-cameral legislature, as the
House of Representatives is closer to the people, making them more vulnerable to ambition,
whereas the Senate holds relative stability as they are distanced from the populous. Therefore,
my knowledge of the principles of limited government, the separation of powers, and checks and
balances will allow me to effectively design instruction where students analyze the purpose
5
The remainder of the seminar focused on how prominent leaders approached reading the
Constitution, as well as debates of the scope and limits of the Judiciary. Both of these discussions
present contentions that are prevalent in our contemporary understandings of the principles of the
Constitution. The continuity of these arguments, including those during the founding era, present
to students the notion that, when deciding the constitutionality of laws, working from the
Founders intentions is far too simplistic. Reason being, the Founders themselves were conflicted
over the same ideas regarding how to read the enumerations and implied powers of the
Constitution, as well as the scope and limits of the judiciary. These particular conflicts present a
continuity of Constitutional interpretation throughout time, regardless of the changes that drove
the need for interpretation. The lecture presented by Professor Holloway greatly demonstrated
this point through letters written by Alexander Hamilton and his arch nemesis, Thomas Jefferson.
Therefore, in order to fully understand the difficulty of turning to the Founders for original
intent, the context of these individuals is imperative. In other words, one cannot fully grasp this
difficulty if they do not understand the stark differences between Hamilton and Jefferson, and
how their divisions bring about differences in how to preserve the Constitution. The use of these
letters, as well as the description of their dynamic personalities, allows students to grapple with
the complexity of understanding the Constitution during its formative years. Ultimately, these
letters are illustrative of how both Hamilton and Jefferson saw one another as subversive to the
The series of letters cover each individuals view on the charter of a National Bank.
Where Hamilton saw the bank as necessarya means to an endJefferson believed that the
bank was a subversion of the rights of the states. Thus, not only do these letters present the
difficulty with turning to the Founders for intent, they further exemplify the different visions of
6
limited government. For example, Hamilton viewed the bank as necessary for energizing the
national government, while providing a means for effectuating the enumerated purse powers,
even if this included the management of national debt. Jefferson, with his strong confederal
views, believed that the bank moved beyond the limits of the Constitution, especially since the
mention of a bank was purposely left out during the Convention. Ultimately, these disputes, and
the disdain that both individuals held for one another, present students with legitimate
complexity that continues into the government of the contemporary United States. With the
implementation of the Affordable Care Act, as well as other controversial legislation, the
diversity of how to approach the reading of the Constitution exemplifies the need for students to
be able to analyze the intent of those involved in the legislative process, as well as their
individual ambitions.
Lastly, with the differences in approaches to reading the Constitution, this seminar most
significantly influenced my understanding of the scope and limits to the Constitution, and how
they have been defined over time. When looking for the source of authority, as well as
supremacy, students typically engage with idea of judicial review as presented in Marbury v.
Madison. However, this text is extremely complex, and the implementation of judicial review is
rarely invoked until 1857 with the decisions presented in Dred Scott v Sanford. Prior to this
revelation, it was my understanding that Marbury v. Madison claimed judicial review, and
therefore judicial supremacy, and from there the Supreme Court was the final arbiter of the
constitutionality of laws. However, this seminar, and the use of court cases during the
antebellum, progressive, civil rights, and contemporary eras demonstrated the pendulum in
7
acknowledging that the scope and limits of the Supreme Court are defined within the contexts of
Professor George concluded that the deliberations over judicial supremacy, as well as the
principles of limited government, separation of powers, and checks and balances, with the
Lincolnian view of the Courts scope and limits. In response to the Dred Scott Decision, Lincoln
warned of the potential for subjecting the citizenry to an eminent tribunal1 if the Supreme
Court was look upon as the final authority for determining the Constitutionality of governmental
affairs. This presents the importance of the principle of popular sovereignty; that the only way to
maintain our republican government is through the demands of the citizenry and the exercise of
enumerated powers to create and effectuate laws. However, in the contemporary United States
the population is socialized to believe that the Supreme Court holds the final decision of
constitutionality, but this becomes highly complex as the agreement with this judicial supremacy
often depends on the moral vantage point. For example, Lincoln may have refused to uphold the
Dred Scott Decision, as he believed that slavery was morally wrong; whereas, Eisenhower
carried out the decision made with Brown v. Board due to its unanimity. Therefore, the
complexity of judicial supremacy, its foundation, and the contentions surrounding various court
cases provides students with the opportunity to explore the context for these decisions, while
discovering the means for exercising their civic efficacy to ensure that decisions of morality do
not have to come before the court. Therefore, designing instruction with inquiry-based learning,
historical thinking skills, and realms through which students can design solutions to
The most important aspect of understanding the debates, creation, continuity, and change of the
Constitutional principles is held through the use of historical thinking skills. Students, like
8
historians, will miss the entirety and complexity of the debates and theories if the source
informationincluding biases, point of view, and experiences of the individual and contexts
are not explored while corroborating evidence. For example, as presented by Professor George,
when drawing conclusions about the reason for the design for the republican form of
government, students must work to understand who individuals like James Madison and
Alexander Hamilton are, while considering their arguments in light of the previous experiences
The exploration of the individual as well as the context of his or her beliefs allows for an
the Revolutionary War; Thomas Jeffersons alignment to states rights which are presumably
credited to his work as a statesman during the Revolution; Abrahams views on the Dred Scott
decision in light of the deep sectional divides present in Antebellum America; and how the
decisions of particular Chief Justices can be analyzed against a backdrop of their times, or with
an understanding of the president whom appointed them to the Judiciary. Overall, the
implementation of historical thinking skills is necessary for students to grasp the complex
understandings and rationale for American jurisprudence. That being said, after coming to a
better understanding of principles of the Constitution, and the context of their formation and
interpretation, I will further develop instruction that allows students to analyze debates, theories,
and actions of our government in light of how the principles of the Constitution are being
As showcased in the lesson plan that I designed, students would be presented with a
series of primary source documents that, essentially, lead them towards analyzing the continuity
of the debate over individual liberties. The essential historical question When there is a threat
9
to national security, should our individual liberties be protected, or does the government have the
power to restrict them poses student with this problem of determining if and when threats to
national security warrant a limit on individual liberties. Fitting within the curriculum of a U.S.
History or American Government course, this lesson, along with the chosen primary sources
the Bill of Rights; the Alien and Sedition Act; the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions; sections of
the PATRIOT Act; and remarks about the PATRIOT Act from the ACLUreinforces the
understandings of the principle of individual liberty indicated in the Bill of Rights, power of the
President, enumerated powers, and public opinion and how it shapes policy. When employing
historical thinking skills, students draw authentic conclusions about conditions of the past, and
As opposed to working through the unique structures and enumerations of the branches
of government the seminar over Constitutional Principles presented a rich set of readings and
discussions over theories behind republicanism, as well as the contentions that continuously
evolved. A similar analysis of these principles within the appropriate scope of the grade-levels
will allow students to walk away with a rich understanding for the political and legal processes
of the United States government. Importance lies in exposing students to the presented
complexities, rather than a simplified rote memorization of the operations and structures of our
government. In other words, while implementing historical thinking skills, students must explore
why our Founders placed emphasis on these particular principles, where each branch derives
their particular authority, and how the citizenry possesses the power to hold their government
accountable.
10
Bibliography
11
1 Abraham Lincoln. Lincolns First Inaugural Address, March 04, 1861.