As the United States expanded territorially and developed economically, the scope and reach of federal power and control increased in unison with widening interpretations of the Constitution. In “American Sovereigns: The People and America’s Constitutional Tradition Before the Civil War”, Fritz outlines the paradigm shift of Americans moving from being both rulers and ruled to simply being ruled, and the accompanying changes in constitutional interpretation that caused this. Fritz highlights the consistent movement away from a Jeffersonian constructivist constitutional interpretation of a weak central government to the Hamiltonian view that the constitution created a strong central government through implied powers, and it is a living breathing
…show more content…
Marshall argued that this title shifted to the United States following the American Revolution. Later Marshall states that “conquest gives a title which the Courts of the conqueror cannot deny (185).” This case was brought about due to territorial expansion and widened the power and scope of federal control by stating the Constitution permitted only the federal government to purchase land from the Indians. From an economic standpoint, this is pure coercion since with the federal government as the only potential buyer there is no …show more content…
Fritz writes of The Whiskey Rebellion (which took place from 1791-1794) as an example of this and a perceived expansion of constitutional powers stemming from economic development. The 1791 passage of the “Whiskey Tax” with treasury secretary Alexander Hamilton’s full support was meant to help pay down the national debt. This tax infuriated Americans on the frontier who in some places used Whiskey as a form of currency. When thousands of protesters marched on Braddock's field, Chief Justice Thomas Kean suggested using military force against them in spite of it being unconstitutional. Hamilton agreed with Kean’s ideas and wanted the government to go after them. Here extra constitutional actions by the federal government were presented by two central governmental figures in a manner that expanded constitutional interpretations by speaking in favor of supplanting it. In this way, we see how the constitution is more than just language and court
Marshall argued that this title shifted to the United States following the American Revolution. Later Marshall states that “conquest gives a title which the Courts of the conqueror cannot deny (185).” This case was brought about due to territorial expansion and widened the power and scope of federal control by stating the Constitution permitted only the federal government to purchase land from the Indians. From an economic standpoint, this is pure coercion since with the federal government as the only potential buyer there is no …show more content…
Fritz writes of The Whiskey Rebellion (which took place from 1791-1794) as an example of this and a perceived expansion of constitutional powers stemming from economic development. The 1791 passage of the “Whiskey Tax” with treasury secretary Alexander Hamilton’s full support was meant to help pay down the national debt. This tax infuriated Americans on the frontier who in some places used Whiskey as a form of currency. When thousands of protesters marched on Braddock's field, Chief Justice Thomas Kean suggested using military force against them in spite of it being unconstitutional. Hamilton agreed with Kean’s ideas and wanted the government to go after them. Here extra constitutional actions by the federal government were presented by two central governmental figures in a manner that expanded constitutional interpretations by speaking in favor of supplanting it. In this way, we see how the constitution is more than just language and court