r51due

下面为大家整理一篇优秀的assignment代写范文- Constitution of the United States，供大家参考学习，这篇论文讨论了美国宪法。1787年美国联邦宪法典由序言和七条正文组成。宪法序言简要阐明了宪法产生的渊源是合众国人民，宪法制定的宗旨是增进联邦的团结、正义、国内外和平、自由和一般福利。宪法创造了一个崭新的政治体制，将联邦制及政府权力制衡的理论变成现实。但由于历史的局限性，美国宪法仍然存在诸多未解决的困境。

The constitution of the United States of America, enacted in 1787, is the world's first written constitution in a modern sense. This constitution created a new political system, turning theories of federalism and checks and balances on government into reality. Due to the limitations of history, there are still many unresolved dilemmas in the American constitution.

The United States constitutional code of 1787 consists of a preamble and seven articles. The preamble to the constitution briefly states that the origin of the constitution is "the people of the United States. Article 1 of the constitution provides for the legislative power; Article 2 prescribes executive power; Article 3 provides for judicial power; The powers conferred upon the states by article 4; Article 5 prescribes the procedures for the introduction and adoption of amendments to the constitution; Article 6 provides for the effective status of the constitution; Article 7 provides for the ratification of the constitution itself.

Constitutional amendment is an important part of the constitution of the United States, which represents the basic development path and direction of the American constitutional system. Under article 5 of the United States constitution, the only formal form of constitutional amendment is the constitutional amendment. On the basis of referring to the bills of rights of the states, Madison drafted twelve amendments to the constitution, which were passed by the first federal congress and submitted to the states for ratification on September 25, 1789. Among them, the first ten amendments, which came into effect on November 3, 1791, are the "bill of rights". Since 1791, the United States has passed 27 amendments.

The constitution of the United States, which came into force in 1789, provided for the separation of powers and checks and balances among the executive, legislative and judicial branches. In order to change this situation, the judicial review system came into being when the Supreme Court was given enough power to balance the top executive organ and the national legislature. Judicial review was established by justice John Marshall in 1803 in marbury v. Madison. Since then, the Supreme Court has examined the legislation enacted by the congress or the executive actions of the President when trying specific cases, in order to decide whether it is unconstitutional.

Due to the limitations of history, the constitution of 1787 was deficient in the following aspects from a later, more democratic perspective:

The constitution of 1787 neither banned slavery nor gave congress the power to do so. In fact, the compromise on slavery not only negated the effective power of congress to prohibit the importation of slaves, which lasted until 1808, but also gave rise to a morally unacceptable law, the fugitive slave act. Under this law, slaves who tried to escape to free states had to be sent back to their slaveholders, who still owned them. It took about three-quarters of a century and a bloody civil war to abolish slavery.

The constitution of 1787 did not guarantee universal suffrage, but left the determination of eligibility to the states themselves. It was excluded by women, African Americans and native Americans. It took about a century and a half for women to be constitutionally guaranteed the right to vote. It took nearly two centuries for the President and congress to pass legislation guaranteeing African Americans the right to vote, barring a handful of state vetoes.

The framers' flawed electoral college, which they hoped would insulate the President from party politics, has, ironically, fallen victim to constitutional law. Although the 12th amendment, passed in 1804, prevented a similar future, even with this amendment, the electoral college was transformed by partisan politics into a way of distributing the votes of the states to the President and vice President.

The question of equal representation in the senate led not only to the most chaotic debate in the constitutional convention, but also to the undemocratic character of the constitution. Should the states be equally represented in congress, or should both Chambers be divided according to population? The delegates had a long and heated debate on this issue. The net result is that every state, regardless of population, has an equal number of senators. This arrangement fails to protect the basic rights and interests of the majority of the deprived minorities and gains disproportionate power over government policies and population at the expense of the powerless minorities.

Congress's power is limited in ways that prevent the federal government from exercising control over the economy. For example, the federal government does not have a clear constitutional mandate to regulate railroad rates, aviation safety, food and medicine, banking, minimum wages, and many other matters. Nor does it have the power to tax income, making it difficult to enact fiscal policy or other safeguards.

The constitution of 1787 did not clearly stipulate the right of final interpretation. It does not stipulate that the Supreme Court of the United States has the final power to interpret the constitution. As a result, the judicial system is the weakest of the three powers, and the separation of powers system is virtually useless. In marbury v Madison, for example, the secretary of state simply ignored a letter from the Supreme Court asking him to explain the reasons for holding appointments.

"The greatest flaw of judicial review is that it USES an undemocratic body to examine the constitutionality of laws made by democratically elected legislatures." From the perspective of the realistic political environment, this system has indeed become the main way to check whether the implementation of the constitution of various countries is in good condition. If there is to be a theoretical justification for judicial review, the only acceptable and admissible reason is that if there is no legal body to enforce a "written constitution containing binding limits on the scope of government power," then what good are those limits.

Whether at the macro level or at the micro level, there are specific legal system problems in judicial review. Whether, and if so, what is the ultimate standard the Supreme Court follows in judicial review. Chief justice Marshall of the Supreme Court held that "as long as the end is lawful and within the limits of the constitution, all appropriate means that are clearly fit for the end and not prohibited but consistent with the letter and spirit of the constitution are constitutional." But such a broad and vague interpretation is controversial. In addition, the Supreme Court declared a law unconstitutional, whether has the retrospective, and also has not a definite conclusion, the Supreme Court's attitude toward the fuzzy often, Supreme Court judge cardozo had offered, for example, whether a retrospective is a matter of policy, owing to the different things that should be aimed at specific concrete analysis case, the specific details of a case by case to make decision.

51due留学教育原创版权郑重声明：原创assignment代写范文源自编辑创作，未经官方许可，网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为，未经同意的情况下，51Due有权追究法律责任。主要业务有assignment代写、essay代写、paper代写服务。

51due为留学生提供最好的assignment代写服务，亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多assignment代写范文 提供北美作业代写服务，详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ：800020041。