Constitution Assignment: Part C

What does Amendment 11 indicate about the relative power of the federal government versus state governments (a question which 65 years later led to the US Civil War)?

The eleventh amendment was designed to prevent residents of a state from taking another state to federal court. This amendment on "Judicial Limits" was ratified in 1795, 65 years before the civil war began. It has significance as distinguishing the difference in how state courts can interact with another, and how federal courts can interact with state courts. Due to this amendment, state courts cannot hear lawsuits against their state brought on by residents of another. It went further to prevent residents of a state from bringing charges against their own state to the federal court. Since the civil war was about succession, that would mean one state suing another for independence from the rest. I think that the eleventh amendment was put in place in order to prevent this sort of thing from happening, where states would sue one another, using a person to file charges and circumvent the amendment. I can see how this would have deeply impacted the issue of slavery at this time. While the country was deeply divided between those for slavery, and abolitionists, the eleventh amendment had never been more significant. Slaves who escaped the south, and in free states sued for their freedom would find that they could not, as a parson could not sue the state in federal court. Even whites, who challenged the laws of slave states and free states, found that the same laws applied to them, and the eleventh amendment made it impossible for say, Virginia to challenge Massachusetts (or vice versa).


Does the 14th amendment combine with the earlier "no religious test" clause to guarantee a vision of a diverse and equitable society with no government discrimination?

The 14th amendment is interesting, because part of it describes what article one says about how representation in the congress is distributed. If we look at that, it is done in a way which ensures a diverse congress, through every state being represented in it. This doesn't guarantee ethnic diversity, due to whites being the vast majority of the united states at this time, but political and intellectual diversity were. As well, it added that, those guilty of treason are ineligible to hold public office, and the debt for the civil war is to be paid for the union, but not the confederates. I do not think that this amendment represents diversity, unity, or opposition of discrimination, for a few reasons. For one, this is an amendment which added insult to injury for the south after the civil war. What this meant for those involved with the confederacy, was that they were now under the constitution, guilty of treason, and the aggressor of the war. Also, the debt from the civil war was voided for the union, and all debts were to be paid by the Confederate states. This did nothing to unite the country, but descriminate against, and enrage half of the country.


Describe the amendment from the rest of the list (16-27) that you find most significant and make an argument for why we should consider it especially important.

I think that the most interesting amendment, is the 22nd amendment. This is what set a presidential term limit 6 years after the death of FDR, the first and only president to exceed the two term limit in American history. The amendment was pushed for by the Republicans, after the democrat Roosevelt had been elected four times (died about a month into his fourth term). I think that the idea behind it is interesting. Their had never before been a president that was elected for more than two terms before Roosevelt was, and that was because the people had felt that he should be president for those years. It is interesting that an amendment would be made to limit how long a person can be president. A lack of a term limit does not go against the constitution in any way, and cannot be manipulated. An example of this is George Bush, he was [elected] twice, but because of how bad a president he has been, he would not be elected to a third term. On the other hand, Franklin D. Roosevelt was an excelent president, elected four times, who took america through a depression, WWII, and implemented the "new deal" social reforms. In my opinion the 22nd amendment simply limits something which should not be limited. It was done for highly political reasons, and does not have a benificial impact on the country.