Federalist Papers No. 1
The purpose of this paper was to introduce the people to the Consitution and to outline why the Constitution was important. Hamilton starts by discussing how the choices of government are reserved by the people and shares how he believes the Constitution will defend those opportunities.
Hamilton also warns of others who seek power and authority. These classes counter the Constitution in favor of strong states, a system that makes it easier for these individuals to maintain power. Thus, Hamilton argues a firm and strong central government is necessary to dissapate these worries.
Again, the purpose of this paper was to introduce the defense of the Constitution and to alert the people of those who seek to oppose it.
Federalist Papers No. 10
The purpose of this paper was to warn the people of factions, the greatest vice known to a free world. Madison then goes on to discuss the solution for controling this vice, a large republic.
I have read Federalis Papers before and have copied my notes from the previous reading. See this article for the full notes.
A faction is when a minority or a majority have a common personal interest against the rights of others. This results in the attempt to seize public institutions to fuel this private interest.
Both federalists and anti-federalists believed that factions were a problem, but disagreed in how to solve it. Anti-federalists believed that a small government would lead to less dangerous factions because if a faction was discovered in a large government, it could adversely affect all.
Federalists disagreed. Madison states that factions are inevitable in a land of liberty. The only way to completely eradicate factions is to either take away liberty, or control the minds and interests of the people. Since that is not an appropriate outlook, we want to try and control the effects of factions.
Madison argues that the best way to control a faction is through a balance of a strong republic. This is because a republic can control for the factions. If a faction arises in a minority, the public will elect people who value the country and snuff out the faction. If the faction arises in the majority, there are more interests in play (other than self-interest) that could limit the factions growth. This is not true in a true democracy, where if the faction is in the majority, then there are no limits on what can be exercised towards the minority.
Federalist Papers No. 51
Again, the notes below are taken from the same link noted above.
The Federalist No. 51 outlines several checks and balances. The list of how these balances work can become quite complicated. Our textbook outlines how these checks work.
“The result is a complex system of checks: National representation, bicameralism, indirect election, distribution of powers, and the federal-state relationship would operate in concert to counteract the effects of faction in spite of the inevitability of the factional spirit.”
– Stone in Constitutional Law Eighth Edition
In summary, all the branches of the federal government are independent enough to counteract the power of other branches, but dependent enough to be checked as well. The legislative, as the largest branch, has an extra security feature built in by splitting it into the house and the senate.
Federalist Papers No. 68
The purpose of this paper was to share Hamilton’s excitement for the electoral college. He reflects how even oponents to the Constitution struggle to dismantle the benefits of the electoral college. Hamilton goes on to say that if it is not perfect, it is at least excellent.
The college is designed to select several (not one) delegate to elect the President of the United States. This method prevents violence and allows the President to function independent of the branches of government (not elected by them). Hamilton also argues the college is the best way to ensure the best candidate wins. The delegations filter out those who are only popular in their respective state and filters in only the best qualities. This same process also continues for the Vice President, keeping that individual independent from the Senate (for purposes of the election).
Federalist Papers No. 70
This paper was to share Hamilton’s insights on why there should be a sole executive. There are several reasons, but the primary reason was because having multiple executives allow those individuals to deny responsibility. That is, executives may participate in activities but put the blame on the other when it comes to pleasing a base.
Federalist Papers No. 78
Courts are to be the weakest brach. Their role is to interpret the constitution and the law. If the law is inconsistent with the constitution, then the constitution prevails. This doesn’t make courts superior, but makes the people superior (because the constitution is being upheld). Courts also fix laws that are at odds with each other. This paper also states reasons why judges term is based on “Good Behavior.” That is, they need the time to continue to learn and understand the law. The longer judges are in term, they develop more experience than those that are not.
The Story of McCulloch: Banking on National Power
Daniel Farber, The Story of McCulloch: Banking on National Power, 20 Const. Comment 679, (2004).
The Farber article provides a good summary of the historical context behind the development of the national bank, and the constitutional arguments that unfolded because of it. Essentially, Madison argued the bank was unconstitutional because it did not follow any inumerated congressional powers and that it was not necessary. Hamilton responded by pointing out the needs for the bank and relied on authority through the necessary and proper clause. Washington sided with Hamilton and passed the bank into law. Nearly 30 years later, McCulloch was heard to determine the consitutionality of the bank. Ultimately, Chief Justice Marshall wrote an opinion that afforded (1) federal supremacy over the states for things common to all the states, (2) granted Congress broad authority to pass laws through constitutional provisions.
Disclaimer
The content contained in this article may contain inaccuracies and is not intended to reflect the opinions, views, beliefs, or practices of any academic professor or publication. Instead, this content is a reflection on the author’s understanding of the law and legal practices.
