Amending the U.S. Constitution versus Passing a Law
Unless otherwise stated, answer in complete sentences, and be sure to use correct English, spelling, and grammar. Sources must be cited in APA format. Your response should be four (4) double‐spaced pages; refer to the “Format Requirementsʺ page located at the beginning of this learning guide for specific format requirements.
Suppose you are part of a political organization that has taken the position that one of the ways to “fix Congress” is to impose term limits on members of the Senate and House of Representatives. Your initial research reflects that it will be necessary to amend the U.S. Constitution to accomplish this. Prepare a plan detailing how your organization will accomplish its goal. Include the following.
1. Provide two (2) reasons why amending the U.S. Constitution would be necessary versus passing a law. Include Marbury v. Madison and U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton.
2. In view of the canons of construction and interpretation, name and explain three (3) necessary elements that you must consider before drafting language to amend the U.S. Constitution.
3. List the two (2) primary paths you would pursue to amend the U.S. Constitution. Cite the applicable section(s) of the Constitution.
4. Explain the three branches of government including each branch’s authority and responsibility. How would your plan impact each branch?
CONSTITUTION
Student’s Name
Institution’s Name
Course Title
Instructor’s Name
Due Date
1 Provide two (2) reasons why amending the U.S. Constitution would be necessary versus passing a law. Include Marbury v. Madison and U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton.
Amending the Constitution rather than enacting a bill via the two houses would be more effective in this scenario. To begin with, the Supreme Court may overturn any statute enacted by Congress, as it did in the Marbury v. Madison decision, which established this precedent.
Marbury v. Madison
Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison (1803) established for the first time that federal courts may reverse a congressional act if it violates the U.S. Constitution. Marbury v. Madison.
It irritated Jefferson when Adams tried to load the federal courts with political supporters just before he became president. They were ordered to be held by his secretary of state, James Madison. Marbury filed a lawsuit in order to save his employment. Writ of mandamus: He petitioned the Supreme Court to order Madison to grant them their commissions.
After Jefferson stopped the nominees’ commissions, which were previously approved and sealed, a court ruled on February 10, 1803, that the rights of Marbury and the others had been infringed. Legally speaking, Marbury may sue for damages and get a federal court to issue an order for Jefferson to comply. A further ruling was made that Congress’s legislation may be struck down if the Supreme Court judged them unconstitutional (Ray, 2019).
Secondly, the two houses of Congress do not have jurisdiction to prolong or restrict the terms of elected officials, as was shown in the case of U.S. Term Limit, Inc v. Thornton.
U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton.
If a candidate for Congress has served three terms in the House of Representatives or two terms in the Senate, an amendment to the Arkansas State Constitution barred that candidate from being on the ballot. The Supreme Court of Arkansas ruled that the amendment was unconstitutional.
2 In view of the canons of construction and interpretation, name and explain three (3) necessary elements that you must consider before drafting language to amend the U.S. Constitution.
Canons of construction and interpretation serve as guidelines for the language used in the Constitution and similar legal documents, ensuring that the language is unambiguous, precise, and brief (Coyle, 2017).
The following three elements would be critical for altering the Constitution: Exclusive Expression, Plain Meaning, and Clear Statement Rule.
* Exclusive Expression
Where a statute clearly limits its application to particular issues, it cannot be expanded to other topics by interpretation or construction. This auxiliary rule is used to interpret acts conferring authority, establishing rights and remedies, limiting common rights, and imposing fines and forfeitures, as well as severely interpreted statutes. It is a technique, not an obligatory rule, used to discern legislative purpose. Additionally, the regulation must be consistent with the legislative purpose.
* Plain Meaning
The plain meaning rule implies that all words in the statute should be given effect to the maximum degree possible when interpreting a statute. Where legislation defines a word or phrase, construction must not be used to give the term or phrase a new meaning. When the legislature defines a word used in a statute, it does not take over the duty of the courts in interpreting the statutes; instead, it just specifies what should be included in the statute. Without legislative purpose to define terms, it is established that words and phrases used in legislation should be given their plain, ordinary, and common use meaning, as backed by the maxim generalia Verba sunt generaliter intelligent, or what is often uttered should be widely understood.
* Clear Statement Rule
According to this rule, courts should not interpret legislation in a manner that concludes that the statute did not intend. If the ...