An Economic Bill of Rights (original) (raw)
Related papers
1900
The clause included in brackets is amended by the XlVth Amendment, 2d section. * This clause in brackets has been superseded by the Xllth Amendment. Abridged, immunities of citizens, not to be, 53 Accused to have a speedy trial, 47 Actions at common law, 48 Acts and proceedings of another State, faith and credit given to, 41 Adjournment-President may convene and adjourn Congress, 37 Admitted, new States may be, 42 Advice and consent of the Senate, 36 Age of Representatives and Senators, 18 Aid and comfort to enemies, 40 Alliance or confederation, 31 Ambassadors, President may appoint, 37 Amendments to the Constitution, 43 Answer for crimes, 47 Appellate jurisdiction, Supreme Court shall have, 38, 39 Appointment of representation, 20, 53 Appropriate legislation-Congress has power, etc., 24, 27, 28, 29 Armies-land and naval forces, 28 Attainder-e:ir-posi-/acio law, 30 Authors and inventors, 27 Ballot for President and Vice-President, 49, 50, 51 Bankruptcies, 27 Bills of credit, 31 Capital crimes, 47 Census, 19, 30 214 ITnDes Chief-Justice shall preside, when, 22 Citizens of the United States, 21, 41,42 ; who are included as, 53 Classification of Senators, 20, 21, 22 Coin a tender in payment of debts, 31 Color, or previous condition of servitude, 56
Richard Bellamy and Jeff King (Eds) The Cambridge Handbook of Constitutional Theory, 2022
This chapter focuses not on the possible content of a Bill of Rights, such as whether it should contain social and economic rights or only civil and political rights, but on the form any such Bill needs to take to be legitimate in a manner congruent with the moral norms of equal concern and respect underlying both rights and democracy. It explores four conceptions of Bills of Rights and the different ways they relate to democratic theory and practice. I start with the view of a Bill of Rights as distinct from normal legislation and that is ultimately the responsibility of the courts to defend. I distinguish between substantive and procedural accounts, in which the first focuses on upholding the rights necessary to ensure the outputs of democratic decisions reflect democratic norms whereas the second seeks to uphold the rights required for a due democratic process. I then turn to legislated rights and the role of Parliamentary Bills of Rights. Finally, I examine the role of democratic constitutional politics as a means for justifying and legitimising such rights instruments, be they upheld by legislatures or courts.
Federalist Papers and the Bill of Rights, The
Const. Comment., 2003
Of all the complaints lodged by the Antifederalists in their campaign to defeat ratification of the Constitution, the failure to attach a bill of rights to the Constitution emerged as the leading and most formidable one. 1 This omission represented an Achilles' heel that might very well have doomed the process of ratification.2 In the 1787 Constitutional Convention, it will be recalled, no one thought of the need for a bill of rights until Virginian delegate George Mason raised the issue just several days before the Convention was due to rise on September 17. "It would give great quiet to the people," he said? Thereupon, Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts submitted a proposal for adding a bill of rights to the Constitution which Mason seconded. The Convention unanimously rejected the proposal by a vote of 10 to 0, * LL.B. (Melbourne), Ph.D. (Columbia); James G. McDonald Professor, Emeritus, of American History, Hebrew University of Jerusalem. This article is dedicated to the memory of Jacob W. Landynski, distinguished scholar of constitutional law. 1. Thus, the Dissent of the minority in the Pennsylvania ratifying convention, issued on December 18, 1787 states: "The first consideration that this review [of the Constitution) suggests is the omission of a BILL OF RIGHTS." 21HE DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF TilE RATIFICATION OF TilE CONSTITUTION 630 (John P. Kaminski & Gaspare J. Saladino eds., 1976) (hereinafter DHRC). And George Lee Turbeville, in a letter to James Madison dated December 11, writes: "The principal objection that the opponents bring forward against this Constitution, is the total want of a Bill of Rights." 8 id. at 232. And in a subsequent letter to Madison dated April 16, 1788, Turbeville refers to the demand for the adoption of a bill of rights as "the favorite Topic of the ablest Antifoederal dedarners." ld. 234-35 n.3. James Wilson, at one point, referred to the complaint over the omission of a bill of rights as "this [subject) so violently supported out of doors." 2 id. at 469-70. 2. As Robert Rutland has written, "(T]he Antifederalists stumbled upon one oversight in the Constitution that bore the appearance of an Achilles' heel"; and they "assiduously promoted the idea that the failure to include a bill of rights was not an oversight, but a studied bit of Federalist deception." ROBERT ALLEN RUTLAND, THE
The use of the term " the Bill of Rights " as a proper noun that refers specifically and exclusively to the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution was largely a result of civic education drives in the 1920s and 1930s. Many in the founding generation called for a bill of rights to be attached to the Constitution, but they never called the first ten amendments " the Bill of Rights. " In the nineteenth century, these amendments had little power, and the bill of rights (usually not capitalized) was often thought to be an abstract set of principles, existing prior to and not co-equal with the first ten amendments. Through a gradual linguistic evolution, driven by a need to define and apply political principles, Americans created " the Bill of Rights " and imbued it with iconic status. This occurred first in legal language in the 1890s, and spread into textbooks, before entering the vocabulary of contributors to newspapers. In the 1930s, while courts and political leaders looked to the Bill of Rights to justify the federal expansion of power, Americans discovered that this iconic document could be used to resist the same. As they debated the nature, purpose, and application of the Bill of Rights, Americans clarified the meaning of the term and empowered it.
The Emergence of Constitutional Rights
Constitutional Political Economy, 1997
Constitutional rights are puzzling in that powerholders are likely to create rights favoring themselves or those on whom they rely to remain in power. Rights granted to all citizens alike, limiting the exercise of power, would appear anomalous. One can articulate a set of circumstances which must be present for constitutional rights to be formulated for the first time, in