Anti Federalist Papers

For stuff that is general.
Post Reply
thibodeaux
Posts: 8056
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 7:32 pm

Anti Federalist Papers

Post by thibodeaux »

My son is at the point in American History class (excuse me: "social studies") where they talk about the Articles of Confederation and why we needed to ditch them.

There's a few blind spots in the way we teach this period in history (pre-Revolution up to Constitution. Call it 1763 - 1787). For one thing: why didn't the Canadian and Caribbean colonies join in the revolt? Hm??? Never even comes up, does it?

But back to the topic. We all know about the Federalist papers arguing FOR the new Constitution. Nobody ever talks about the ANTI Federalist papers (you might hear of the Anti-Federalist party, maybe a little). Well, they exist:
https://thefederalistpapers.org/anti-federalist-papers

I don't ever feel like I have the time, but it would be interesting to review and see how right they were. For example:
https://thefederalistpapers.org/antifed ... aper-78-79
The supreme court under this constitution would be exalted above all other power in the government, and subject to no control. The business of this paper will be to illustrate this, and to show the danger that will result from it. I question whether the world ever saw, in any period of it, a court of justice invested with such immense powers, and yet placed in a situation so little responsible...
[the authors of the constitution] have made the judges independent, in the fullest sense of the word. There is no power above them, to control any of their decisions. There is no authority that can remove them, and they cannot be controlled by the laws of the legislature. In short, they are independent of the people, of the legislature, and of every power under heaven....
The power of this court is in many cases superior to that of the legislature. I have showed, in a former paper, that this court will be authorised to decide upon the meaning of the constitution; and that, not only according to the natural and obvious meaning of the words, but also according to the spirit and intention of it. In the exercise of this power they will not be subordinate to, but above the legislature...If, therefore, the legislature pass any laws, inconsistent with the sense the judges put upon the constitution, they will declare it void;
Does anyone doubt that our true rulers are now the courts? Followed closely by civil servants who openly declare their intent to rule in whatever way they personally choose?
TheCatt
Site Admin
Posts: 53949
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Cary, NC

Anti Federalist Papers

Post by TheCatt »

thibodeaux wrote: There is no power above them, to control any of their decisions
Judiciary can always be constrained by amending the constitution. This statement is hyperbole.
thibodeaux wrote: There is no authority that can remove them,
Even SCOTUS can be impeached.
thibodeaux wrote: they cannot be controlled by the laws of the legislature.
Also not true.
thibodeaux wrote: I have showed, in a former paper, that this court will be authorised to decide upon the meaning of the constitution; and that, not only according to the natural and obvious meaning of the words, but also according to the spirit and intention of it.
Kinda true, but can always be clarified by Congress.
It's not me, it's someone else.
TheCatt
Site Admin
Posts: 53949
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Cary, NC

Anti Federalist Papers

Post by TheCatt »

thibodeaux wrote: Does anyone doubt that our true rulers are now the courts? Followed closely by civil servants who openly declare their intent to rule in whatever way they personally choose?
I read the 2nd half as administrative state, but maybe it is, maybe it isn't.
SCOTUS takes on administrative state

Thib's world powers clash.
It's not me, it's someone else.
Post Reply