The 27th Amendment: Congressional Pay and State Legal Dynamics

The 27th Amendment to the United States Constitution, ratified in 1992, exemplifies the principles of accountability and fairness in government by addressing the issue of congressional pay raises. As we navigate the intricate legal landscapes of all 50 states, we explore the profound connection between the 27th Amendment and state laws, uncovering how this amendment shapes the dynamics of congressional compensation.

Curbing Congressional Compensation

The 27th Amendment emerged from the principles of fiscal responsibility and transparency in government. It aims to ensure that members of Congress cannot unilaterally raise their own pay. By addressing the sensitive issue of congressional compensation, the amendment underscores the importance of government accountability to its constituents.

State Legislative Involvement

The 27th Amendment’s connection to state laws is evident in its ratification process, which required approval from state legislatures. Each state’s decision to ratify the amendment contributes to the collective movement toward holding elected officials accountable for their compensation decisions.

Impact on State Laws

While the 27th Amendment directly pertains to congressional pay, its influence on state laws extends to issues related to public sector compensation. States often mirror federal principles in their own compensation practices, recognizing the importance of fiscal responsibility and public trust in the administration of taxpayer funds.

Balanced Budget Considerations

The amendment’s impact on state laws can be seen in the broader context of balanced budget considerations. As states grapple with budgetary constraints and public demands for responsible fiscal management, the principles underlying the 27th Amendment guide discussions about compensation practices and accountability.

Contemporary Relevance

In an era marked by concerns about government spending and the role of elected officials, the 27th Amendment remains relevant. Discussions about congressional compensation, public sector salary structures, and the ethical obligations of elected officials are informed by the principles enshrined in the amendment.

Ensuring Transparency and Accountability

The 27th Amendment underscores the importance of transparency and accountability in government operations. Its connection to state laws highlights the broader commitment to responsible governance and fiscal management, not only at the federal level but also within individual states.

Upholding Public Trust

The 27th Amendment stands as a testament to the United States’ commitment to accountability and responsible government. Its connection to state laws underscores the importance of aligning compensation practices with the principles of fiscal responsibility and transparency. As we navigate the intricate legal landscapes of all 50 states, we recognize that the 27th Amendment’s impact reverberates through history, shaping the expectations placed on elected officials and contributing to the public’s trust in government operations.

The 27th amendment is unique in that it took nearly 200 years since it was proposed to actually be ratified by the states. The 27th amendment deals with pay raise or decreases for members of Congress.

Changes to Congressional pay must take effect after the next term of office for the representatives. This means that another election would have had to occur before the pay raises can take effect.

The fact that Congress has the power to set its salary was something that worried the original authors of the amendment that would become the 27th amendment in 1992. Many states too, during the debates over ratifying the Constitution, expressed concern over congressional pay. During the first round of ratification, only six states, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Delaware, Vermont, and Virginia ratified the amendment. Other states would ratify this amendment in bursts, with the digest drive toward ratification occurring the in late ‘80s to early 90s.

You may wonder why an amendment could be ratified almost 200 years after its proposal. In the Supreme Court case of Coleman v. Miller, the court ruled that if the amendment had an unspecified date, then the state legislatures could approve the amendment at any time.

You may remember that some amendments, such as the 21st amendment repealing Prohibition specified a frame of seven years that would render the amendment “inoperative.” The amendment that would become the 27th amendment did not have such a provision, which allowed the final states, Missouri, Michigan, New Jersey, and Illinois to all ratify the amendment in May of 1992 and force its ratification over the objections of some elected officials.

Only 38 states were required to ratify the amendment, but Kentucky found out that it had ratified the amendment decades earlier and the few remaining states all ratified the amendment in quick succession before the Archivist of the United States certified the amendment. Congress would then pass a resolution agreeing the amendment was valid, ending the challenges to it.

What is the text of the 27th Amendment?

No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.
(No law that would pay representative more or less in salary or other income will be allowed to take effect until after there has been another election)

What is a COLA?

A cost of living adjustment (COLA) allows salaries to rise to keep pace with inflation. Inflation is when prices go up because the value of money has gone down. This allows for instant increases in salary. The 27th amendment was found not to have control over COLA and the Supreme Court refused to hear any case about the right of Congress to collect COLA on their salaries.

Schenck v. United States: A Landmark Supreme Court Case Shaping Freedom of Speech

Introduction

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution, which guarantees the freedom of speech, is one of the cornerstones of American democracy. However, the extent to which this right can be exercised has been a subject of intense debate and numerous legal challenges throughout the nation’s history. One of the most significant cases that helped define the boundaries of free speech in the United States is Schenck v. United States.

Schenck v. United States, decided in 1919, marked a crucial turning point in the interpretation of the First Amendment. This landmark Supreme Court case involved issues related to freedom of speech during times of war, and its ruling had a profound and lasting impact on the way the United States balances national security concerns with individual rights. In this article, we will explore the historical context, facts, legal arguments, and the lasting legacy of Schenck v. United States.

I. Historical Context

To fully understand the significance of Schenck v. United States, it’s essential to consider the historical context in which it unfolded. The case took place during World War I, a time when the United States was deeply involved in the global conflict. The war brought about significant social and political changes in the country, including an increased emphasis on national loyalty and security.

The United States was in the throes of the First Red Scare, a period of intense anti-communist and anti-radical sentiment. The Russian Revolution of 1917 had raised concerns about the spread of radical ideas, leading to a heightened fear of political dissent and perceived threats to the government. In response to these fears, the U.S. government implemented measures to suppress dissent and bolster national unity.

One such measure was the Espionage Act of 1917, which made it a crime to interfere with the draft or obstruct military recruitment, among other things. This law set the stage for the legal challenge that would ultimately lead to the Schenck case.

II. The Facts of Schenck v. United States

The case of Schenck v. United States revolved around Charles T. Schenck, the general secretary of the Socialist Party of America. Schenck and his colleagues distributed pamphlets to potential draftees during World War I. These pamphlets urged men to resist the draft and argued that the conscription process violated their rights. The key question in the case was whether Schenck’s actions constituted a form of speech protected by the First Amendment or if they posed a clear and present danger to the nation’s security.

Schenck’s pamphlets contained strong language, including phrases like “Assert your rights” and “Do not submit to intimidation.” The government argued that these pamphlets encouraged insubordination and obstructed the war effort, thereby presenting a clear and present danger. Schenck, along with co-defendant Elizabeth Baer, was charged with violating the Espionage Act.

III. Legal Arguments

Schenck and Baer’s case was heard by the United States Supreme Court, where they raised several legal arguments in their defense. The central issue at hand was whether their actions constituted protected speech under the First Amendment. The Court’s decision would establish a precedent for determining the limits of free speech during wartime.

1. Freedom of Speech: Schenck’s defense argued that his actions were protected by the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech. They contended that distributing pamphlets expressing his anti-draft views was a legitimate exercise of his right to free speech and did not pose a clear and present danger to national security.

2. Clear and Present Danger Test: The government, on the other hand, relied on the “clear and present danger” test established in the landmark case of Schenck v. United States. This test, articulated by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., in his opinion, held that speech could be restricted if it presented a clear and present danger to the country. The government argued that Schenck’s pamphlets crossed this threshold by encouraging resistance to the draft.

3. Prior Restraint: Schenck’s defense also raised the issue of prior restraint, arguing that the government’s actions violated the First Amendment by censoring speech before it was expressed. They contended that the government should not have the power to prevent the distribution of ideas before they posed an actual threat.

IV. The Supreme Court’s Decision

In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., the Supreme Court ruled against Schenck and upheld his conviction. The Court held that the Espionage Act did not violate the First Amendment, and Schenck’s speech was not protected in this context.

Justice Holmes famously wrote in his opinion that “the most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic.” This metaphorical expression became a cornerstone of First Amendment jurisprudence and was used to justify limiting speech that presented a clear and present danger to society.

The Court’s decision established the “clear and present danger” test as the standard for evaluating free speech cases during wartime. It meant that the government could restrict speech if it posed an imminent threat to national security, even if it did not directly incite violence. This interpretation of the First Amendment allowed for greater government control over speech during times of war and crisis.

V. The Legacy of Schenck v. United States

Schenck v. United States left a significant and lasting impact on the development of First Amendment jurisprudence in the United States. Its legacy can be observed in several key aspects:

1. The “Clear and Present Danger” Test: The case established the “clear and present danger” test as the standard for evaluating free speech cases during wartime. This test has been influential in subsequent Supreme Court decisions that grapple with the balance between national security and individual rights.

2. Limiting Free Speech in Times of Crisis: Schenck set a precedent for the government’s ability to restrict speech during times of crisis, particularly during wartime. It legitimized measures to curb dissent and maintain national unity in the face of perceived threats.

3. Freedom of Speech Challenges: Schenck continues to be cited in modern legal challenges involving freedom of speech. The case has been invoked in debates over issues such as hate speech, political protests, and national security concerns, illustrating its ongoing relevance.

4. Evolution of First Amendment Interpretation: While Schenck initially limited the scope of free speech rights, subsequent Supreme Court decisions have refined and expanded these rights. The Court has struck a balance between protecting individual liberties and allowing for necessary restrictions in certain circumstances.

Conclusion

Schenck v. United States remains a pivotal Supreme Court case in the history of American constitutional law, particularly concerning freedom of speech. In the context of World War I and the First Red Scare, the case established the “clear and present danger” test, which continues to shape how the United States balances individual rights with national security concerns. It serves as a reminder of the complex and evolving nature of free speech in a democratic society, highlighting the enduring tension between liberty and security.

Schenck v. United States was a landmark case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1919. The case centered around the question of whether speech that constituted criticism of the government and its policies during wartime was protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Below is an in-depth discussion of Schenck v. United States, including how it occurred, how it was resolved, and its impact on the US legal system.

Background

During World War I, Congress passed the Espionage Act of 1917, which made it a crime to interfere with the war effort or to promote disloyalty or mutiny in the military. Many people opposed the war, and some expressed their dissent through speeches and writings that criticized the government and its policies.

One individual who was particularly vocal in his criticism was Charles Schenck, the General Secretary of the Socialist Party of America. Schenck and other members of the Socialist Party pamphleteered against the war, particularly the military draft, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

When the United States entered World War I in April 1917, Schenck produced a leaflet titled “Long Live the Constitution of the United States”. The leaflet argued that the draft was unconstitutional and encouraged citizens to resist the draft through nonviolent means. Schenck was subsequently arrested and charged with violating the Espionage Act.

Process

In Schenck v. United States, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether Schenck’s speech constituted a “clear and present danger” that could be legally restricted by the government.

In a unanimous decision, the Court ruled that Schenck had indeed violated the Espionage Act and that his speech was not protected by the First Amendment. The Court held that the purpose of Schenck’s leaflet was to obstruct the draft and the war effort, and that it presented a clear and present danger to national security.

The Court famously invoked the metaphor of “yelling fire in a crowded theater,” arguing that free speech could be curtailed if it presented a danger to public safety. The Court held that Schenck’s speech was no more protected under the Constitution than falsely shouting “fire!” in a crowded theater.

Impact on the US legal system

The Schenck decision had significant repercussions for the First Amendment and the balance between free speech and national security. The decision established the “clear and present danger” test, which has been used in a subsequent Supreme Court cases to determine when the government can restrict speech on the grounds of national security.

The Schenck decision also highlighted the power of the government to restrict speech during times of war or other national emergencies. The decision set a precedent that allowed the government to curtail free speech in situations where it felt that public safety was at risk.

However, the Schenck decision has also been criticized for its potential to widen the scope of government censorship and for its potential chilling effect on dissent. In particular, the decision has been used by some governments to justify the suppression of political speech that is critical of the ruling party or government policies.

Ten Interesting Facts about Schenck v. United States

1. The Schenck decision was one of the first major Supreme Court cases to deal with the issue of free speech and the First Amendment.

2. The case was heard by the Supreme Court in 1919, at the height of World War I.

3. Charles Schenck was a prominent socialist activist and was affiliated with the Socialist Party of America.

4. Schenck’s leaflet “Long Live the Constitution of the United States” argued that the draft was unconstitutional and that citizens had the right to resist it.

5. The Supreme Court’s decision in Schenck v. United States was unanimous.

6. The “clear and present danger” test established in Schenck has been used in subsequent Supreme Court cases to determine the constitutionality of speech restrictions.

7. The Schenck decision has been cited by supporters of government censorship and restrictions on free speech, particularly in times of war or national emergency.

8. The “yelling fire in a crowded theater” metaphor has become a well-known shorthand for the limits of free speech.

9. The Schenck decision has been subject to criticism by those who argue that it gives the government too much power to suppress political speech.

10. The decision has been used as a precedent in a wide range of cases dealing with issues of free speech, national security, and government power.

Schenck v. the United States: The Background

The case of Schenck v. the United States took place in the year of 1919. This groundbreaking trial started with a man named Charles Schenck who was arrested for organizing a protest against the military draft undertaken by the Federal Government.

The Government held the draft for World War I; random male citizens who were of age were selected to fight for the country in this enormous war. Charles Schenck, who was a member of the Socialist Party, distributed over 20,000 pamphlets to United States citizens to form a protest against the draft process. Schenck felt that the draft was a form of slavery and should be outlawed by a free country.

During his organized protest; however, Schenck was arrested on the grounds that he was in direct violation of the Espionage Act. This law, which was passed in 1917, required that any protest or form of anti-government speech must be in line with the United States’ ability to protect the wellbeing of its citizens. The Federal Government believes that a person trying to spark a violent movement or cause uproar is in violation of the Espionage Act. As a result, Mr. Charles Schenck was arrested for his efforts in forming mass protests against the draft.

Schenck v. the United States: The Case Profile

The case of Schenck v. the United States took place from January 9th, 1919 to January 10th. Schenck, who was found guilty in the original trial, appealed the charges by claiming the U.S. had sparked slave-like laws. Schenck pointed to the 13th Amendment as his main support; this Amendment outlawed slavery and forced service. Schenck stated that a military draft and forced enlistment may be classified as a measure of slavery.

In addition to the provisions of the 13th Amendment, Charles Schenck also claimed that the government is not allowed to censor his writings. He believed that by censoring his works, the Government was violating his civil liberties of free speech and free expression which are both guaranteed by the United States Constitution.

The Schenck v. United States case was decided on March 3rd of 1919. Although the original case found Schenck guilty, he appealed the charges and brought the Schenck v. the United States case to the United States Supreme Court.

Schenck v. the United States: The Verdict

In Schenck v. the United States, the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government. The court distinguished between dangerous expressions and dangerous acts, stating that the sentiments expressed in Schenck’s writings were considered to be an immediate threat to the country’s safety and the wellbeing of its people.

Article 6 Overview

Article VI of the United States Constitution is a crucial article that outlines the supremacy of the federal laws over state laws. The article dictates that the federal government is supreme to the states in terms of lawmaking and adjudication. This article has had a massive impact on the United States since its inception, and it continues to have an ongoing influence on the country’s legal system. 

The First Clause

This article is broken down into three sections, which are known as “clauses.” Each clause specifies a critical aspect of the United States Constitution and the overall legal system. The first clause is known as the “Supremacy Clause,” which makes it clear that the federal government’s laws and the Constitution itself are the supreme law of the land. This means that all state laws must be in accordance with federal law, and if there is ever a conflict between a state law and a federal law, the federal law will always prevail. 

The Second Clause

The second clause is known as the “Oath or Affirmation Clause,” which requires all federal and state officials to take and uphold an oath or affirmation to support the Constitution. The purpose of this clause is to ensure that anyone elected or appointed to a government position will remain loyal to the Constitution and adhere to its principles. 

The Third Clause

The third and final clause is known as the “Religious Test Clause,” which prohibits any religious test being used as a requirement to hold a government position. This clause ensures that the government does not discriminate against any person’s religion or beliefs, and it helps protect the religious freedoms granted in the First Amendment. 

Impact on the United States

The Supremacy Clause has been of particular importance throughout U.S. history. It has enabled the federal government to maintain a centralized approach to policymaking and lawmaking, which is essential in a diverse country like America. In the early days of the nation, the Supremacy Clause played a significant role in the ratification of the Constitution. The Constitution had been written to replace the Articles of Confederation, which was the governing document of the United States before the Constitution was ratified. The Articles of Confederation had given too much power to the states, which made it challenging to make national decisions that affected the whole country. The Supremacy Clause in the new Constitution helped ensure that the federal government would maintain control over national policy. 

The Supremacy Clause has been used throughout history for numerous significant federal actions. For example, in 1957, during the Civil Rights Movement, the governor of Arkansas, Orval Faubus, defied federal law by refusing to desegregate Little Rock Central High School. However, President Eisenhower had the power to use the Supremacy Clause and dispatch the National Guard to ensure that the school was integrated. This was a crucial moment in American history, and it showcased the Supremacy Clause’s power in maintaining the rule of law. 

Similarly, in the landmark Supreme Court case of Marbury v. Madison, Chief Justice John Marshall relied heavily on the Supremacy Clause to establish the Court’s power of judicial review. The Court asserted its power to declare actions of the federal government unconstitutional in relation to the Constitution. The case marked a key moment in American history, as it established the judiciary as an equal branch of government and helped to further establish the supremacy of federal law over state law. 

The Supremacy Clause has continued to be relevant in modern times as well. For instance, in 2017, the state of California passed a law that banned any state-funded travel to states that LGBTQ people (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer) alleged had discriminatory policies. However, the federal government, citing the Supremacy Clause, intervened and argued that such boycotts could not be supported by state funds due to the supremacy of federal law over state law. This example shows how the Supremacy Clause continues to inform the legal boundaries of state laws and has a profound influence on modern policy and laws. 

The Oath or Affirmation Clause is also vital to the U.S. legal system. This clause establishes the importance of upholding the Constitution and following its principles. All elected and appointed government officials must take this oath or affirmation before taking office, making it clear that they must adhere to the Constitution. This clause ensures that those in power are devoted to the Constitution and its values, making it harder for them to stray from its principles. 

In the modern-day, there have been instances where this clause has been invoked. For example, in 2018, following the community’s protests against the Trump administration’s separation of children from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border, some elected officials were publicly accused of violating their Oath or Affirmation Clause. Critics of the officials argued that their complicity in this policy contradicted their oath to uphold the Constitution and its values, including individual rights and due process. This case shows the continued relevance of the Oath or Affirmation Clause in maintaining government officials under the Constitution’s authority. 

The Religious Test Clause has also had a profound impact on American history and culture. This clause explicitly states that no religious test must be conducted to hold any government position. By doing this, the clause promotes religious freedom and prevents any one religious group from gaining an unfair political advantage. Essentially, this clause mandates a secular government, which has become a foundation of American democracy and tradition. 

In American history, the clause has often been considered a crucial aspect of the country’s religious freedom. For example, in the 1960 presidential election, John F. Kennedy, a Catholic, faced intense scrutiny about his faith.

What is Article 6 of the Constitution?

Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution first says that any debts or engagements that the country was involved in before the Constitution was put into action are still valid. Article 6 also says that the United States Constitution is the highest law of the country and that all state and federal officers and judges have to uphold the Constitution and all of its rules.

How is Article 6 Broken Down?

While many other Articles of the Constitution are broken down into sections and clauses, Article 6 of the United States Constitution is just three clauses long.

Text of Article 6 of the Constitution

The text of Article 6 is as follows:

“All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States”

Clause 1 of Article 6: Debts

Clause 1 of Article 6 says that if there were any debts before adopting the Constitution, they are still valid and have the same terms as if they were still under the Articles of Confederation.

Clause 2 of Article 6: the Supremacy Clause

Clause 2 of Article 6 is known as the Supremacy Clause. In this clause, the Constitution says that any federal laws that are made according to the Constitution are the supreme laws. That means that state laws that go against federal laws are not valid. Even state courts must follow federal law before state law.

Clause 3 of Article 6: Oaths

Clause 3 of Article 6 is the final clause of Article6. It says that executive officers, judges, and state and federal legislators must follow an oath saying that they will support the Constitution.

Introduction

Robert Morris is considered one of the most prominent Founding Fathers of the United States of America, and his contributions to the American Revolution and the establishment of American democracy are numerous. Morris was a successful businessman and politician, who served as the Superintendent of Finance for the Continental Congress during the Revolution. His work was instrumental in providing financing for the Patriots during the war and was vital to the ultimate success of the American Revolution. Additionally, Robert Morris was a key contributor to the establishment of the United States as a nation, with his participation in the Constitutional Convention and his role as a member of the United States Senate.

Early Life and Family

Robert Morris was born on January 31, 1734, in Liverpool, England. His father was a tobacco merchant, and his family was considered to be part of the middle class. Morris was educated at a private school in England before moving to the United States in his teens to work for a shipping company in Maryland. After working for several years, Morris moved to Philadelphia and began working for a series of merchants, eventually becoming a successful businessman in his own right.

Morris married Mary White, the daughter of a prominent physician, in 1769. The couple had five children together, two sons, and three daughters. Morris was known to be a devoted family man and provided a comfortable life for his family with his successful business ventures.

Role in the American Revolution

Morris played a vital role in the American Revolution and is considered to be one of the most important figures in the financing of the war effort. He participated in the Continental Congress from 1775 to 1778 and acted as the Congress’s Superintendent of Finance from 1781 to 1784. He was responsible for raising funds to support the war effort, and he used his personal credit and connections to borrow money from European banks and wealthy individuals.

Morris was often credited with preventing a financial collapse of the Continental Army by using his personal funds to support the war effort. His financial contributions to the Revolution were invaluable, and without his efforts, the war may have ended differently. Morris was also a signatory to the Declaration of Independence, and his dedication to American liberty is evident throughout his work during the Revolution.

Constitutional Convention and United States Senate

After the American Revolution ended, Morris continued to play a vital role in the establishment of the United States as a nation. He participated in the Constitutional Convention in 1787, representing Pennsylvania, and he was a significant contributor to the development of the United States Constitution. Morris kept a daily journal during the Convention, which detailed the discussions and debates surrounding the creation of the new government, and it is considered an essential historical document.

After the ratification of the United States Constitution, Morris was appointed as one of Pennsylvania’s two members to the United States Senate. His work in the Senate helped to establish many of the financial and economic policies that would guide the newly formed government, and his experience as the Superintendent of Finance during the Revolution made him particularly well-suited to lead these efforts.

Final Years and Legacy

Morris’s final years were marked by financial difficulties, which led him to spend time in debtors’ prisons. He eventually retired from public life and passed away on May 8, 1806.

Despite the struggles he faced later in life, Robert Morris’s contributions to America and the cause of liberty cannot be overstated. His role in financing the American Revolution is considered essential to the country’s success and his work in the Constitutional Convention and the United States Senate helped to establish the foundation for American democracy. Morris was a dedicated public servant and a visionary leader who worked tirelessly to establish a country that would be governed by the people, for the people.

Conclusion

Robert Morris was a successful businessman, a financial expert, and a dedicated public servant who played a vital role in the establishment of the United States of America. As the Superintendent of Finance for the Continental Congress, Morris helped to finance the American Revolution, and his contributions were essential to the ultimate success of the Patriots. He also played a significant role in the creation of the United States Constitution and helped to establish many of the policies and institutions that would guide the new government.

Morris’s legacy as a patriot, statesman, and visionary leader is still felt today, and his contributions to American democracy continue to be recognized and celebrated. His work helped to establish a country founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, and justice for all, and his dedication to these ideals will be remembered for generations to come.

Founding Father: Robert Morris

Robert Morris was born in Liverpool, England on January 20, 1734. When he was 13 years of age, he moved to Maryland to live with his father, a tobacco exporter in Oxford, Maryland.

After a little bit of schooling in Philadelphia, Robert Morris started working at Thomas and Charles Willing’s shipping-banking firm. In 1754, Robert became a partner after the death of Charles. For almost 40, years, Morris was a directory of the firm as well as an important Philadelphia citizen. At the age of 35, Robert Morris married Mary White, with whom he had five sons and two daughters.

During the Stamp Act was being considered by the British Parliament in 1765, Robert Morris joined other merchants to protest the act. However, he only really committed himself to the Revolution after more fighting started almost a decade later. In 1775, he set up a contract with Continental Congress to bring arms and ammunition into the country.

He was also elected to be the Pennsylvania council of safety between 1775 and 1776, the provincial assembly between 1775 and 1776, the legislature between 1776 and 1778, and the Continental Congress from 1775 to 1778. In the Continental Congress, Robert Morris voted against independence for the colonies on July 1, 1776. He thought it was too early for the colonies to be independent. However, the next day he did not vote on purpose in order to help by his approval.

As an important congressman, Robert Morris dealt with military and finance-related issues. Although he had made a lot of money from his firm, he may have had to quit if he did not have any contracts with the Continental Army. Morris worked very closely with General George Washington, borrowed supplies and money from the states, managed to borrowed money even when there was very little, and even took out personal loans to help the Revolutionary War.

After his time in Congress, Robert Morris stayed in the Pennsylvania legislature for two more terms. During this time, many others attacked him because they thought he was profiting in Congress. Even though he was not, it still hurt his reputation.

Robert Morris began the dramatic part of his career when he accepted the position of Superintendent of Finance from 1781 to 1784, which was under the Articles of Confederation. Morris cut all military and government expenditures, purchased army and navy supplies with his own money, kept a close eye on accounting, and sometimes used his personal credit to help. Later, he was re-elected for a term in the Pennsylvania legislature between 1785 and 1786. In 1789, he declined President Washington’s offer to be the first Secretary of the Treasury. Instead, he took a seat in the U.S. Senate for one term from 1789 to 1795.

In the later years of his life, was not very responsible with his money, and found himself being chased by creditors. He tried to hide by going to his estate called “The Hills,” but he turned himself soon after. He went to debtor’s prison until 1801 when he was released. Unfortunately by then, his money and property were gone, he was sick, and his spirit was broken. He lived in a small Philadelphia home on money that was given to his wife by Gouverneur Morris. Robert Morris passed away on May 8, 1806, at the age of 73.

Fun Facts about Robert Morris

•Robert Morris was born on January 20, making him a Capricorn.

•Robert Morris used his own up to create the Bank of North America, which was the very first government-incorporated bank in the country.

•He owned slaves that worked as servants in his home.

•His nickname is the “Financier of the Revolution”.

Introduction

The Arizona v Gant case was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court that had a significant impact on the Fourth Amendment and the power of law enforcement to conduct searches of vehicles incident to arrest. The case involved the question of whether police officers may search the passenger compartment of a vehicle incident to a recent occupant’s arrest even if the arrestee is not within reaching distance of the vehicle at the time of the search. The Supreme Court’s decision in Arizona v Gant established a new standard for such searches of vehicles and clarified the scope of the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Background

In April 2005, Rodney Gant was arrested in Tucson, Arizona, by police officers who suspected him of driving on a suspended license. Gant was handcuffed and placed in the back of a police car. One of the officers then searched Gant’s car, which was parked nearby, and found a bag of cocaine and drug paraphernalia.

Gant was charged with drug-related offenses, but he challenged the search of his car as a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. The case eventually made its way to the Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case to determine whether the search of Gant’s vehicle was constitutional.

The Court’s Decision

In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court held that police officers may only conduct a search of a vehicle incident to an arrest when it is reasonable to believe the arrestee could access the vehicle at the time of the search or that the vehicle contains evidence of the crime that led to the arrest.

The Court reasoned that when an arrestee is in custody and removed from the scene, there is no longer a risk that the arrestee could access the vehicle to retrieve a weapon or evidence. The Court also emphasized that searches incident to arrest must be based on the circumstances of each case, and that a generalized concern for officer safety or the police’s duty to investigate a crime is not enough to justify a search.

Impact and Legacy

The decision in Arizona v Gant had a significant impact on the power of law enforcement to conduct searches incident to arrest. The decision clarified the scope of the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures and set a new standard for such searches of vehicles.

The decision was also significant in emphasizing the importance of individualized judgments in determining the scope of searches incident to arrest. The Court’s decision in Arizona v Gant required officers to consider the specific circumstances of each case in determining whether a search of a vehicle incident to arrest is constitutional.

Conclusion

Arizona v Gant was a landmark case that established a new standard for searches incident to arrest and clarified the scope of the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. The decision had significant implications for the power of law enforcement and emphasized the importance of individualized judgments in determining the constitutionality of searches. The decision remains an important part of American legal history and continues to shape the interpretation and application of the Fourth Amendment in criminal cases.

Background: Arizona v. Gant

The case of Arizona v. Gant concerns a man named Rodney Joseph Gant. This man was arrested because he was driving with a suspended driver’s license.

After Mr. Gant was taken by the police, the officers conducted a search on his vehicle where they discovered guns and illegal drugs. Because of this search, Mr. Gant was not only charged with illegal operation of a motor vehicle (remember he did not have a valid driver’s license) but also with illegal possession of a dangerous drug.

After he was arrested, Gant cleverly cited the Arizona Police Department with partaking in an illegal search and seizure. Mr. Gant was apparently a good student because he knew that the police officers had violated his constitutional rights—all citizens of the United States are protected against illegal search and seizures by the 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The Case: Arizona V. Gant

The Arizona v. Gant case was heard on October 7th of 2008. The case dealt with administrative law; it questioned the “due process” clause of the United States Constitution. The due process clause refers to the government’s obligation to respect, maintain, and uphold the rights of American citizens when they are arrested.

All state governments, as well as the Federal government, are required to uphold this clause; these bodies must preserve and protect a citizen’s liberties and rights. The United States Government must uphold the right to respectful and fair treatment when a citizen is detained by police officers.

In Arizona v. Gant, Mr. Gant said that the Arizona police officers who pulled him over-performed an illegal search of his car. The search was conducted without a warrant; a warrant is the expressed legal permission for the police to enter a citizen’s personal or private property with the intent to find illegal things.

Mr. Gant said that the Arizona police officers acted without probable cause. The United States Supreme Court in Gant v. Arizona ruled in favor of Mr. Gant, stating that the police officers conducted an illegal search because they did not have probable cause to enter Mr. Grant’s vehicle. The police officers could only search for Mr. Gant’s car if there was something alarming about the vehicle. Something that made the police officers curious and made them think, “Hey something illegal is going on here.”

The Supreme Court ruled that the Arizona police department lacked evidence to search Mr. Gant’s car. In Gant V. Arizona the court ruled that the police could only assume Mr. Gant was in violation of just the illegal operation of a car. Because of this, the Supreme Court overruled Mr. Gant’s conviction of illegal possession of guns and drugs.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Mr. Gant in Gant v. Arizona because the 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution does not allow police officers or any government workers to conduct unlawful search and seizures of a citizen’s personal belongings.

Article 7 Overview

Article VII of the United States Constitution reads, “The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.” This article outlines the process by which the Constitution was ratified and became effective between the ratifying states. The significance of Article VII cannot be overstated, as it played a crucial role in the establishment of the United States as a constitutional republic.

The ratification process of the Constitution was no easy task. It required the approval of nine out of thirteen states. This was not a simple majority, but rather a supermajority, as it required the agreement of a two-thirds majority. The framers of the Constitution understood that the establishment of a new government required significant support from the states. Furthermore, they acknowledged the importance of having a strong and effective central government to maintain order and promote the general welfare of the country.

The ratification process began on September 17, 1787, when the Constitution was signed at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. The document was then sent to the states for their consideration. Nine states ratified the document by June 1788, and the Constitution went into effect on March 4, 1789, when the new government was inaugurated.

The ratification of the Constitution was not without its detractors. The Anti-Federalists, a group of individuals who opposed the Constitution, argued that it gave too much power to the central government and threatened the liberty of the people. They also claimed that the Constitution did not adequately protect individual rights and lacked a bill of rights. In response to these concerns, the Federalists, those who supported the Constitution, agreed to add a Bill of Rights to the Constitution. The Bill of Rights, which includes the first ten amendments, was added in 1791.

Impact on the United States

The significance of Article VII can be seen in the impact it had on the formation of the United States. Without the ratification of the Constitution, there would be no United States as we know it today. The ratification of the Constitution led to the establishment of a powerful central government that has helped maintain order and stability in the country. Furthermore, the ratification of the Constitution set a precedent for future constitutional amendments and the way in which they are ratified.

In addition to its historical significance, Article VII continues to play a role in shaping current events. States continue to ratify new amendments to the Constitution as they are proposed. For example, when the Fourteenth Amendment was proposed in 1866, Congress required the ratification of three-fourths of the states before it could be added to the Constitution. The ratification process of the Fourteenth Amendment was tumultuous, as many states initially rejected it before ultimately ratifying it in 1868.

Today, Article VII remains relevant in the ongoing fight for constitutional amendments. For example, the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), which would guarantee equal rights for women in the Constitution, was first proposed in 1972. However, the amendment failed to receive the required ratification by three-fourths of the states before the deadline in 1982. In recent years, several states have voted to ratify the amendment, and Congress is currently considering extending the deadline for ratification.

Article VII has also influenced the way laws are made and implemented in individual states. The Constitution outlines the powers and responsibilities of the federal government, but it also leaves room for states to make their own laws and regulations. Each state has its own constitution, which often includes provisions that allow for revisions and amendments. These changes must go throusgh a similar ratification process as the Constitution, requiring a supermajority of support from the states.

Conclusion

In summary, Article VII of the United States Constitution played a significant role in the establishment of the United States as a constitutional republic. The ratification of the Constitution was no easy task, but the supermajority required by Article VII ensured that the new government would have sufficient support from the states. Furthermore, the ratification of the Constitution set a precedent for future constitutional amendments and the way in which they are ratified. Today, Article VII remains relevant in the ongoing fight for constitutional amendments, and it continues to influence the way laws are made and implemented in individual states.

What is Article 7 of the Constitution?

Article 7 of the U.S. Constitution is the very last article of the United States Constitution. Article 7 explains how many state ratifications are needed in order for the proposed Constitution to take place in the United States and how a state could go about ratifying the Constitution. Before the Constitution, all of the states were following the government that was created in the Articles of Confederation.

How is Article 7 Broken Down?

While many other Articles of the Constitution are broken down into sections and clauses, Article 7 of the United States Constitution is just one sentence long.

Text of Article 7 of the Constitution

The text of Article 7 is only one sentence long. This clause says the following:

” The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.”

Background of Article 7 of the Constitution 

According to Article 7, at least nine states needed to ratify the Constitution in order for it to be applied to all of the states. The states began ratifying the Constitution on December 7, 1787, when the Delaware legislature ratified the United States Constitution. The ninth state to ratify was New Hampshire on June 21, 1788. At this point, the only states who had not ratified out of the thirteen original colonies were Virginia, North Carolina, and New York. It was important to have the rest of the states ratify because Virginia had the most people living and New York was the richest state. These two states eventually ratified before Congress of the Confederation set up March 4, 1789, as the day to start proceeding under the United States Government. Rhode Island and North Carolina ratified the United States Constitution after the Bill of Rights were given to the states to ratify.

The Order of Ratifying By the States

It took two and a half years for all of the states to ratify the United States Constitution. They did this in the following order:

• Delaware on December 7, 1787

• Pennsylvania on December 12, 1787

• New Jersey on December 18, 1787

• Georgia on January 2, 1788

• Connecticut on January 9, 1788

• Massachusetts on February 6, 1788

• Maryland on April 28, 1788

• South Carolina on May 23, 1788

• New Hampshire on June 21, 1788

• Virginia on June 25, 1788

• New York on July 26, 1788

• North Carolina on November 21, 1789

• Rhode Island on May 29, 1790

Roger Sherman: A Founding Father and Influential Politician

Roger Sherman is a name that may not be as well-known as some of the other Founding Fathers of the United States, but his contributions to the nation were just as important. He was a man of many talents – a lawyer, politician, and even a scientist. Ov

Roger Sherman was born on April 19th, 1721 in Newton, Massachusetts. He was the second son of William and Mehetable Sherman, who were both from families that had settled in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in the late 1600s. Roger’s father was a farmer and a shoemaker, and the Shermans were not a wealthy family.

At the age of 19, Roger Sherman moved to Connecticut to work as a clerk in a store in New Milford. While he was working there, he began to read law books in his spare time, and he eventually became an apprentice to a lawyer in New Milford. In 1743, he was admitted to the bar and set up his own law practice in New Milford.

Career as a Politician

Roger Sherman’s career in politics began in 1755, when he was elected to the Connecticut General Assembly. He would go on to serve in this legislature for many years, and he also served as a justice of the peace, a judge, and a member of the governor’s council.

Sherman was a strong supporter of American independence, and he was one of the original members of the Continental Congress in 1774. He was also one of five men who were appointed to draft the Declaration of Independence in 1776. While he did not write the famous document himself, he played an important role in its creation. He was known for his ability to compromise and find common ground, and he helped to bring the various factions within the Continental Congress together.

Sherman continued to serve in the Continental Congress until 1781, when he was appointed to serve on the committee that drafted the Articles of Confederation. He is credited with proposing the Great Compromise, which solved a heated debate between large and small states over representation in Congress. This compromise created a bicameral legislature with equal representation in the Senate and representation by population in the House of Representatives.

In 1783, Sherman was elected as the first mayor of New Haven, Connecticut. He would go on to serve in various positions in the Connecticut government over the next decade, including as a delegate to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in 1787.

Contributions to Drafting the United States Constitution

Roger Sherman’s most significant contribution to American government may well have been his work in drafting the United States Constitution. He was one of the most active and influential members of the convention that drafted the document, which would become the foundation of the American political system.

Sherman was a strong proponent of a strong central government, but he was also concerned about protecting the rights of the individual states. This led him to support the creation of a system of federalism, where power would be shared between the central government and the states.

Throughout the course of the convention, Sherman played a key role in shaping many of the key provisions of the Constitution. He was a member of both the Committee of Detail and the Committee of Style, which were responsible for organizing and revising the various proposals that were put forward by the delegates.

Sherman was also instrumental in creating the Connecticut Compromise, which resolved a dispute over representation in Congress that had threatened to derail the entire process. This compromise set up a bicameral legislature with equal representation in the Senate and proportional representation in the House of Representatives, much like the Great Compromise had done for the Articles of Confederation.

Later Life and Legacy

After the Constitutional Convention, Roger Sherman continued to serve in various positions of government. In 1789, he was elected to serve as a representative in the United States House of Representatives, and he served in this capacity until his death in 1793.

Throughout his career, Sherman was known for his honesty, his integrity, and his devotion to the cause of American independence. He was also a deeply religious man, and he believed that the Christian faith was essential to the survival of the American republic.

Today, Roger Sherman is often overshadowed by his more famous contemporaries like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin. However, his contributions to American government cannot be overlooked. He played a key role in drafting three of the most important documents in American history – the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, and the United States Constitution – and he helped to shape the American political system in countless ways.

His legacy lives on today in the form of the Connecticut Compromise, which remains an essential part of the American political system. It is a testament to his vision and his skill as a statesman that the federal government he helped to create is still functioning more than two centuries after its creation.

Founding Father: Roger Sherman

Early Life of Roger Sherman

Roger Sherman was born on April 19, 1721, in Newton, Massachusetts. When he was two years old, his family moved to Stoughton where he attended the country school and began learning how to be a cobbler from his father. As a young boy, Roger Sherman wanted to read and learn and did as much as possible during his spare time.

Two years after his father died in 1743, Roger Sherman moved to New Milford, Connecticut to live with his older brother. Here he worked as a surveyor, purchased a store, and studied law. In 1749, he married Elizabeth Hartwell, with whom he had 7 children. He also became a lawyer in 1754. From here, Roger Sherman began his political career. He was a representative for New Milford in the Connecticut Assembly between 1755 and 1756 and from 1758 to 1761.

Political Career

In 1761, Roger Sherman decided to stop practicing law and then moved to New Haven, Connecticut. He managed two different stores then and also became a friend and supporter of Yale College. He was also the treasurer of Yale College for many years. 3 years after his wife’s death in 1763, Roger Sherman got married a second time to Rebecca Prescott. He had 8 children with her.

Throughout this time, Roger Sherman was a very important man. He was a justice of the peace and the county judge, but then he became an associate judge of the Superior Court of Connecticut, he represented both houses of the assembly. Although Roger Sherman did not like extremism, he still fought against Great Britain.

Continental Congress

Roger Sherman was influential as a member of the Continental Congress between 1774 to 1781 and 1783 to 1784. Roger Sherman was a member of the committees that drafted the Articles of Confederation as well as the Declaration of Independence. He was also involved in other things like Indian affairs or military issues.

When Roger Sherman was in Congress, he still participated in local politics. He was still the judge of the Superior Court of Connecticut. He was also a member of the council of safety. In 1784, Roger Sherman became mayor of New Haven.

The last thing Roger Sherman served as was a representative in the United States House of Representatives from 1789 to 1791 and then the Senate between 1791and 179. Here he supported the Federalists.

Roger Sherman died at the age of 72 in New Haven on July 24, 1793. He is buried in the Grove Street Cemetery.

Facts about Roger Sherman

•Roger Sherman had 15 children.

•Roger Sherman held offices in all three branches of the government.

•Roger Sherman was the second oldest person at the Constitutional Convention.

Atkins v. Virginia was a landmark case that was decided by the United States Supreme Court in 2002. The case dealt with the constitutionality of the death penalty for individuals with intellectual disabilities. In this article, we will delve into the details of the case, including how it came about, how it ended, the process of the case, and the way it has influenced the United States legal system. We will also provide 10 interesting facts about the court case.

Background

The case began in 1996 when a man named Daryl Renard Atkins was convicted of capital murder in Virginia for his involvement in the robbery and murder of a young man named Eric Nesbitt. Atkins was sentenced to death, and his lawyers immediately began to appeal the sentence. The issue at the heart of the case was whether it was constitutional to execute an individual with intellectual disabilities.

Process

After several rounds of appeals, the case eventually made its way to the United States Supreme Court. In 2002, the Court heard oral arguments and issued a ruling in Atkins v. Virginia. The Court held that it was unconstitutional to execute an individual with intellectual disabilities. The decision was based on the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which prohibits “cruel and unusual punishments.”

The Court found that the execution of individuals with intellectual disabilities was cruel and unusual because these individuals lacked the moral culpability that was necessary to justify the death penalty. The Court also noted that a majority of states had already banned the execution of individuals with intellectual disabilities, and that the trend towards abolition of this practice was evidence of a national consensus against it.

Impact on the US legal system

The Atkins v. Virginia case had a significant impact on the legal landscape of the United States. The decision established that individuals with intellectual disabilities were entitled to the same constitutional protections as anyone else, and that the death penalty was not an appropriate punishment for these individuals. The decision also helped to shift the national conversation around capital punishment, highlighting the need for greater protections for vulnerable populations.

Below are Ten Interesting Facts about Atkins v. Virginia:

1. Daryl Atkins had an IQ of 59, which is below the threshold for intellectual disability.

2. In 2002, there were 20 states that authorized the execution of individuals with intellectual disabilities.

3. At the time of the case, the Court had already banned the execution of individuals with intellectual disabilities in several other contexts, such as juveniles and the mentally ill.

4. The Court’s decision in Atkins v. Virginia was a 6-3 decision, with Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and William Rehnquist dissenting.

5. The Court’s decision in Atkins v. Virginia was influenced by the fact that several other countries had already abolished the death penalty for individuals with intellectual disabilities.

6. The decision in Atkins v. Virginia has been used as a basis for expanding legal protections for individuals with intellectual disabilities in other areas, such as voting rights and access to healthcare.

7. In 2014, the Court extended the protections afforded to individuals with intellectual disabilities in Atkins v. Virginia to juveniles, ruling that it was unconstitutional to impose a mandatory sentence of life without parole on a juvenile.

8. The decision in Atkins v. Virginia was greeted with a mix of praise and criticism from legal experts and advocacy groups.

9. The case helped to shift the national conversation about the death penalty in the United States, highlighting the need for greater protections for vulnerable populations.

10. The decision in Atkins v. Virginia has been cited in numerous subsequent cases dealing with the rights of individuals with disabilities, including cases dealing with employment discrimination, education, and housing.

The Background: Atkins V. Virginia

The case of Atkins V. Virginia starts off with a man named Daryl Renard Atkins and his friend. These two men were convicted of robbing and murdering a man. When Mr. Atkins and his friend told the police about what happened, they gave two different stories. The mix-up was primarily due to the fact that Mr. Atkins was handicapped; his brain did not properly work. The presiding jury over the original Atkins V. Virginia case sentenced Mr. Atkins to death. The jury accepted his friend’s testimony as truth and thought that Mr. Atkins was lying.

The Case: Atkins V. Virginia

The case of Atkins v. Virginia dealt with administrative law. This legal field regulates the due process clause which refers to the government’s obligation to maintain and respect the legal rights of American citizens in the event they are arrested. All governments in the United States are required, by law, to protect and preserve a citizen’s human liberties and rights. This means that the government is required to treat all arrested citizens fairly.

Mr. Atkins appealed the death sentence. His lawyer said that the execution of an individual who is medically determined to be handicapped was a direct violation of Mr. Atkins’ 8th Amendment rights. This constitutional amendment states that the government may not punish an individual in a cruel or unusual manner. Mr. Atkins’s lawyer thought the government should not be allowed to sentence Mr. Atkins to death because he was mentally challenged.

The Ruling: Atkins V. Virginia

In Atkins V. Virginia, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the execution of any person who is mentally handicapped or challenged was a direct violation of the 8th Amendment to the United States Constitution. Not only did the Supreme Court not allow Mr. Atkins to be put to death, but they also overturned the case. The Supreme Court instead put both Mr. Atkins and his friend in jail for the remainder of their lives.

The court ruling in Atkins V. Virginia was reversed because the 8th amendment addresses criminal procedure; the amendment does not allow any actions that are considered cruel and unusual with regards to prosecuting a citizen.

Article 1

Article I of the United States Constitution establishes the legislative branch of the federal government. The branch, composed of the House of Representatives and Senate, is responsible for making laws.

Section 1 of Article I states that all legislative powers shall be vested in the Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives. Section 2 outlines the requirements for becoming a member of the House, including being at least 25 years old, a citizen for at least 7 years, and a resident of the state being represented. Section 3 outlines the requirements for becoming a senator, including being at least 30 years old, a citizen for at least 9 years, and a resident of the state being represented.

Sections 4 and 5 establish the procedures for holding elections, and organizing and conducting the activities of Congress. Furthermore, Section 6 grants members of Congress immunity for anything they say during a session of Congress. “They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same.”

Section 7 outlines the process for passing bills and laws, including the requirement that all bills raising revenue must originate in the House of Representatives. Section 8 outlines the powers of Congress, which include declaring war, regulating commerce, providing for the common defense, and establishing immigration policy.

Sections 9 and 10 outline the things that Congress is prohibited from doing, such as passing bills of attainder or ex post facto laws, and entering into treaties without the consent of the President.

In summary, Article I of the Constitution establishes the legislative branch of the federal government and outlines the procedures and requirements for becoming a member of Congress. It also sets out the powers of Congress and the things that it is prohibited from doing.

Article 2

Article II of the Constitution establishes the executive branch of the federal government. The branch is responsible for enforcing laws and executing the directives of Congress and the President.

Section 1 of Article II outlines the requirements for becoming President, including being a natural-born citizen, at least 35 years old, and a resident of the United States for at least 14 years. It also establishes the Electoral College as the method for electing the President.

Sections 2 and 3 detail the powers of the President, which include serving as commander-in-chief of the military, granting pardons, and making appointments. Section 4 outlines the process for removing the President from office through impeachment.

In summary, Article II of the Constitution establishes the executive branch of the federal government and outlines the requirements for becoming President. It also sets out the powers of the President and the process for removing the President from office.

Article 3

Article III of the Constitution establishes the judicial branch of the federal government. The branch is responsible for interpreting and implementing the laws passed by Congress and the executive orders issued by the President.

Section 1 of Article III establishes the Supreme Court and gives Congress the power to establish inferior courts. Sections 2 and 3 describe the types of cases that the federal courts have jurisdiction over and outline the rights of the accused in criminal cases.

In summary, Article III of the Constitution establishes the judicial branch of the federal government and outlines the types of cases that the federal courts have jurisdiction over.

Article 4

Article IV of the Constitution details the relationship between the states and the federal government. It says that “Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.” This means that the legal decisions made in one state should be honored in every other state. It also requires that the federal government ensure that every state is provided a republican form of government.

Section 2 outlines the privileges and immunities that each state is granted, including the right to travel freely and be protected from discrimination. Section 3 establishes the process for admitting new states to the union.

In summary, Article IV of the Constitution outlines the relationship between the states and the federal government and sets out the rights and privileges that are granted to each state.

Article 5

Article V of the Constitution outlines the process for amending the Constitution. It states that amendments may be proposed by either Congress or a national convention called by Congress. A proposed amendment must be ratified by three-quarters of the states in order to become law.

In summary, Article V of the Constitution outlines the process for amending the Constitution and establishing new laws.

Article 6

Article VI of the Constitution establishes the supremacy of federal law over state law. It also requires all federal and state officials to swear an oath of allegiance to the Constitution.

“In full faith and credit” of Article IV means that the courts of one state must honor the decisions and judgments of other states’ courts. The Constitution specifies that, “Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.”

In summary, Article VI of the Constitution establishes the supremacy of federal law over state law and requires all federal and state officials to swear an oath of allegiance to the Constitution.

Article 7

Article VII of the Constitution establishes the process for ratifying the Constitution. It required the approval of nine states in order to become law.

In summary, Article VII of the Constitution establishes the process for ratifying the Constitution.

Conclusion

The Constitution was created to establish a system of government that would protect individual liberties and guarantee the basic rights of all citizens. Each of the articles in the Constitution was designed to outline the responsibilities of each branch of the government and to create a framework for the functioning of a democratic republic. By setting out the responsibilities of each branch, the Constitution ensures that no single branch becomes too powerful and that the government remains accountable to the people.

Understanding the Articles of the United States Constitution

The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the United States. The Constitution is made of the Preamble and seven different articles. Together, these articles are the foundation for how the United States government is organized. The Articles of the Constitution also explain how the federal government interacts with the citizens, states, and people of the country.

Who Wrote the Articles of the Constitution?

The Constitution and all of its Articles were written in 1787. Between May 1787 and September 1787, the group of men now known as the Framers met to talk about what should be included in the Articles of the United States Constitution. Because the current government under the Articles of Confederation did not work well, the framers hoped to create a better government. There were 55 Framers of the United States Constitution, included George Washington, James Madison, Ben Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, and more. The Framers had many arguments and debates about what should be included in the Articles. They also made many speeches. After a lot of talking, they finally decided on all the details of the Constitution.

When Were the Articles of the Constitution Ratified?

The Constitution had to be ratified by at least nine states in order to become the law of the land. After two and a half years, all 13 states agreed to ratify the Articles of the Constitution. The Constitution and its Articles were adopted into the United States on September 17, 1787, during the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia.

What are the Articles of Articles of The Constitution?

Together, the articles of the constitution work to establish the branches of the federal government and describe what powers they have.

Article 1 of the Constitution

Article 1 gives Congress its powers and limits. Congress is the branch of the government who can make laws for the country. Article 1 also creates the two sections of Congress, the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Article 2 of the Constitution

Article 2 of the Constitution makes the executive branch of the government. The Executive branch has the responsibility and authority for the administration on a daily basis. In the United States, the executive branch is made up of the President and executive officers.

Article 3 of the Constitution

Article 3 of the Constitution creates a judicial branch in the United States. The Judicial branch is the court system that interprets the law. In the United States, the judicial branch includes the Supreme Court and the lower courts which are made by Congress.

Article 4 of the Constitution

Article 4 of the Constitution talks about the states. Article 4 talks about what responsibilities and duties the states have along with what responsibilities the federal government has to each state.

Article 5 of the Constitution

Article 5 says that the only way the Constitution can be changed is by adding an amendment.

Article 6 of the Constitution

Article 6 says that any debts or engagements that the country had before adopting the Constitution are still valid. Article 6 also says that the Constitution is the highest law and that all officers and judges have to uphold the Constitution.

Article 7 of the Constitution

Article 7 of the U.S. Constitution is the final article of the Constitution. This article explains how many states need to ratify the Constitution.

Introduction

Samuel Adams was a Founding Father of the United States of America, a Bostonian statesman, and a political philosopher known for his dedication to the American Revolution and his leadership in the struggle against British rule. As a member of the Continental Congress, he helped to draft the Declaration of Independence, and as a signatory of the document, he committed his life and fortune to the cause of American liberty. Through his work as a statesman and political philosopher, Samuel Adams helped to establish the fundamental principles of American democracy and set forth a vision for a nation that would be governed by the people, for the people.

Early Life and Family

Samuel Adams was born on September 27, 1722, in Boston, Massachusetts, to Samuel Adams Sr. and Mary Fifield. His father was a prosperous brewer, and his mother was the daughter of a wealthy merchant. Samuel Adams Sr. was an active member of the Old South Church, and he instilled in his son a deep sense of religious piety and a commitment to public service.

Samuel Adams was the second of twelve children, and he grew up in a household that valued education and civic engagement. He attended Boston Latin School, where he excelled as a student and developed a keen interest in politics and public affairs. After completing his studies at Boston Latin, Adams went on to study at Harvard College, where he received a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1740.

After completing his studies at Harvard, Samuel Adams returned to Boston and began working in his father’s brewery. Despite his initial reluctance to enter the family business, Samuel Adams eventually became a successful brewer in his own right, and he used his position in the industry to promote his political and social views.

The Boston Massacre and the Tea Party

Samuel Adams first rose to prominence in American politics during the years leading up to the American Revolution. He played an instrumental role in organizing the protests against British taxation and in mobilizing public support for American independence.

One of Samuel Adams’ most significant contributions to the cause of American freedom was his role in the Boston Massacre. On March 5, 1770, British soldiers fired into a crowd of Bostonians, killing five and injuring several others. Samuel Adams seized upon the incident as an opportunity to galvanize public support for the American cause, and he used his position as a legislator to call for a full investigation into the matter.

Adams’ efforts to hold the British soldiers accountable for their actions helped to fuel the flames of the American Revolution, and he continued to be a vocal advocate for American independence in the years that followed. He was a key leader in the Boston Tea Party of 1773, when colonists dressed as Native Americans dumped British tea into Boston Harbor in protest of the Tea Act. His activism and leadership helped to set the stage for the American Revolution and paved the way for American independence.

The American Revolution and Beyond

Samuel Adams’ contributions to the American Revolution extended far beyond his role in the Boston Massacre and the Boston Tea Party. He was a member of the Continental Congress, serving from 1774 to 1781, and he was one of the primary architects of the American Revolution.

During his time in Congress, Adams helped to draft the Declaration of Independence, which laid out the fundamental principles of American democracy and set forth a vision for a nation that would be governed by the people, for the people. He played an instrumental role in securing the support of the Southern colonies for the Patriot cause, and he worked tirelessly to promote the principles of American democracy throughout the war.

After the war, Samuel Adams continued to serve as a leader in American politics, serving as the governor of Massachusetts from 1793 to 1797. He remained a vocal advocate for individual liberty and democratic governance and continued to promote his political and social views until his death in 1803.

Legacy and Impact

Samuel Adams’ contributions to the American Revolution and the nation he helped to create have had far-reaching consequences. Through his leadership as a statesman and political philosopher, Adams helped to establish the fundamental principles of American democracy and set forth a vision for a nation that would be governed by the people, for the people.

His commitment to individual liberty and democratic governance has influenced generations of political leaders, and his legacy continues to shape American politics and society to this day. Samuel Adams was a visionary leader and a true patriot, and his contributions to America will be remembered for generations to come.

Conclusion

Samuel Adams was a Founding Father, a Bostonian statesman, and a political philosopher known for his dedication to the American Revolution and his leadership in the struggle against British rule. Through his work as a statesman and political philosopher, Samuel Adams helped to establish the fundamental principles of American democracy and set forth a vision for a nation that would be governed by the people, for the people.

His legacy continues to shape American politics and society to this day, and his contributions to America will be remembered for generations to come. As the United States of America continues to face new challenges and navigate an ever-changing political landscape, the ideals and values championed by Samuel Adams will remain as relevant as ever, serving as a beacon of hope and inspiration for all Americans.

Founding Father: Samuel Adams

Early Life of Samuel Adams

Samuel Adams was born on September 27, 1722, in Quincy, Massachusetts. His family was well off and respected in the community. Samuel Adams went to Boston Latin School and then went on to go to Harvard College. Afterward, he got his master’s degree. Samuel Adams decided to get involved in the business. Unfortunately, he lost all the money that his father had saved for him.

Samuel Adams and Politics

After this, Samuel Adams decided to go into politics, which he was very good at. He could work very late and make great speeches. He also led meetings in houses and taverns where he explained that Americans should have the right to govern themselves. In 1763, the British government announced that they would start taxing American trade. Samuel Adams was very upset and wrote a letter saying that if a trade could be taxed, what else could the British government start tax? These laws would slowly ruin any chance of the colonies being able to govern themselves.

Samuel Adams became very famous for what he said. Soon, Samuel Adams was at the very center of the patriotic movement that wanted the colonies to have its own representation in Great Britain’s government. This was also the very beginning of the movement for independence. Samuel Adams started the Country Party, which included many farmers who also believed in his ideas.

Around this time, Samuel Adams was also a founder and important member of the Sons of Liberty, a secret organization that supported independence for the colonies. This was the organization that was involved in the Boston Tea Party.

In 1765, Samuel Adams was elected as the representative of Boston to the Massachusetts legislature. Here, Samuel Adams influenced many of the laws that were made. Samuel Adams was on every single committee and he went to every event. Samuel Adams also wrote many arguments against the actions of the British government.

Samuel Adams became better known over the next few years. One of the most important points was during the Boston Massacre of 1790. Samuel Adams realized that the colonists could not win against the British Army. Even though he was very angry that six Americans had been killed, he convinced the governor of Massachusetts to remove the troops from Boston for a while to prevent more fighting. Doing this gave him even more respect from both sides.

Continental Congress

Samuel Adams went to the First Continental Congress as the delegate from Boston. Samuel Adams also went to the Second Continental Congress as well, where he argued for independence from Great Britain. He was one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence.

During the Revolutionary War, he urged Americans to fight for their independence from the British.

At the Constitutional Convention, he signed the new Constitution, but only he was sure that a Bill of Rights would follow afterward. Samuel Adams served in the Continental Congress until his attempt to retire in 1781. He was then elected him to the state senate and afterward to the office of lieutenant governor. After Governor John Hancock passed away in 1794, Samuel Adams became Governor until he retired once more in 1797. The next six years of his life were very quiet. He passed away at the age of 82 in 1803.

Facts about Samuel Adams

•Samuel Adams was born in the same area as John Adams and John Hancock.

•At the age of 42, he did not have enough money to support his family. Thankfully friends and neighbors helped him.

•Samuel Adams had 6 children, but only two of them lived to adulthood.