The conflicting views and interpretations of the true meaning and construction of the United States Constitution with regards to the power of the Federal and State governments have much historical significance to as to the outlook or vision of the Federalist Party and the need to uphold the US Constitution. Led by Alexander Hamilton, the Federalists argued for a loose and purposive construction of the meaning the words “necessary and proper” concerning the power and right of either the Central government or individual States to influence commercial interests of the US. Another Federalist was John Marshall whose Federalist views played out in his opinion in Marbury v Madison (1803). On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists, among them Thomas Jefferson advocated for an increased power of States other than the Federal government over the formation of a national bank. He was particularly for a decentralized agrarian republic or Union over fears that s Central government with too much power would be tyrannical and abusive of its competencies. This paper analyzes how Marshall’s views in Madison case and Hamilton’s opinion on the formation of a national bank reflect on the vision and outlook of the Federalist Party. It also explains why upholding and honoring the US Constitution was particularly important for the Federalists.
At issue in the Marbury, the case was the Constitutionality of the Judiciary Act of 1789 about the expansion of the US Judiciary through the appointment of new Commissions. Marshall, the then Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court, used his position to demonstrate the view of the Federalist political vision and agenda. According to him, the judiciary has the sole responsibility of declaring what the law is and hence had the authority to declare an Act of Congress to be invalid and void if it was in conflict with the US Constitution. Using his federalist views, Marshall argued that it was within the Province of the Supreme Court to judge the Constitutionality of executive actions and Congressional laws. This, to a greater extent, meant that more laws would be subject to Federal judicial review thus espousing and augmenting the Federalists’ view and support for a stronger Federal government since the Supreme Court is a Federal institution. It indicates the Federalist Party’s long-time vision of having a strong centralized government and institutions over the States.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In his opinion regarding the constitutionality of the national bank, Alexander Hamilton, an ardent Federalist, expressed views that indicated his Federalist ideological inclination. According to Mohammed (2016), Hamilton’s vision as Federalist since his role as the Secretary of Treasury was that of a unified government and nation. He believed that the US would achieve greatness by promoting commerce, industry and manufacturing. It is for this reason that he defended his establishment of a national bank to help stabilize the country financially and lift it out of debts. His main view over the power of the US Congress to authorize the formation of the national bank was that there was a need for a liberal reading and interpretation of Article I of the US Constitution, which gave Congress the power to do anything deemed necessary in performing its national duties. His views differed sharply with those of Jefferson, who was of the opinion that the US Congress need only take actions that are necessary. This thus represented the original vision of the Federalist Party, which was a strong central government with extensive powers and privileges over commerce, industry and manufacturing. It also reflected the Party’s vision for a liberal and purposive interpretation of the US Constitution.
Finally, according to Maggs (2007), upholding the honor and spirit of the US Constitution were specifically necessary for the Federalists to help preserve the “original meaning” and context of the Constitution (p. 805). They wished not to erode the initial structures of government that the framers of the Constitution had established and to ensure that the Constitutional authority is only used sparingly for the common welfare of the US Citizens. As Stone and Marshall (2011) have pointed out, the framers of the US Constitution designed the document to endure and to reflect the American vision continually. According to them, Constitutional Interpretation should aim at giving life and substance to the principles and values espoused in the Constitutional text, and this is what the Federalists wished to uphold.
References
Maggs, G. (2007). A concise guide to the Federalist papers as a source of the original meaning of the United States Constitution. Boston University Law Review, 87 , 801-842.
Stone, G., & Marshall, W. P. (2011, Summer). The framers' constitution. Democracy Journal of Ideas, 21 , 1-10. Retrieved July 6, 2016, from http://democracyjournal.org/magazine/21/the-framers-constitution/
Mohammed A. (2016). Chapter 6: Forging a New Nation, 1790–1828. In U.S. History . Cengage Learning, Cengage Learning
