It is truly noteworthy that the United States of America is not the continent of North America filled with contiguous independent state countries with no national oversight. We forget that the Constitution was nothing short of a miracle. After the Revolution, the bankrupt states were less than forthcoming in paying revolutionary debts and not exactly harmonious in interstate trade and commerce, creating obstacles that disadvantaged those from out of state. Powerful patriots such as Patrick Henry ("Give me Liberty, or Give me Death") and George Mason (who wrote the Bill of Rights for Virginia's Constitution) fought ardently against what was to become the Constitution of the United States. They argued that a powerful national government would usurp a citizen's rights and tax the people onerously, while eradicating the unique governing abilities of the individual states. The battle to ratify the Constitution was anything but a given. The majority of the population then existing were swayed by fears of another tyrannical government, much akin to Great Britain ('no taxation without representation'). Their thoughts equated to why trade one national government for another? Let the states rule leniently. The problem turned out to be just that. The individual states were horribly delinquent in not paying back debts (preferring to forget them), and powerless in fights against each other (with onerous laws favoring one state over another interfering with trade and commerce).
After the national Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, the Pennsylvania ratifying Constitutional Convention had to resort to arrests in order to form the legally required quorum to debate ratifying the Constitution. Elected delegates who represented the people's interest in not giving more power to the national government, had to be rounded up and essentially arrested to return back to the ratifying Convention. Pennsylvania delegates felt keenly they should make a strong showing for ratifying the Constitution, so that the other influential states (Virginia and New York) would follow its example. After all, the Constitution was created there. Virginia came very close to not ratifying the national Constitution. Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and George Mason, among other notable Founding Fathers, were strongly against it. Future Supreme Court Justice John Marshall, who had fought alongside George Washington in the Revolution (unlike Thomas Jefferson who chose not to fight at all) recognized the inherent necessities of a powerful, overseeing, national government in order for the United States to meets its obligations and prosper. The logical reasoning and charming personality of John Marshall in his incisive arguments for ratifying the Constitution at the Convention were enough (alongside mastermind James Madison's help) to win the day. The anti-Constitutionalists were able to make a strong showing for a Constitution which included a Bill of Rights that was indeed later adopted as amendments to the Constitution with ratification being prefaced on this understanding. Thankfully the anti-Constitutionalists were defeated, but their critically important Bill of Rights was not.
After the national Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, the Pennsylvania ratifying Constitutional Convention had to resort to arrests in order to form the legally required quorum to debate ratifying the Constitution. Elected delegates who represented the people's interest in not giving more power to the national government, had to be rounded up and essentially arrested to return back to the ratifying Convention. Pennsylvania delegates felt keenly they should make a strong showing for ratifying the Constitution, so that the other influential states (Virginia and New York) would follow its example. After all, the Constitution was created there. Virginia came very close to not ratifying the national Constitution. Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and George Mason, among other notable Founding Fathers, were strongly against it. Future Supreme Court Justice John Marshall, who had fought alongside George Washington in the Revolution (unlike Thomas Jefferson who chose not to fight at all) recognized the inherent necessities of a powerful, overseeing, national government in order for the United States to meets its obligations and prosper. The logical reasoning and charming personality of John Marshall in his incisive arguments for ratifying the Constitution at the Convention were enough (alongside mastermind James Madison's help) to win the day. The anti-Constitutionalists were able to make a strong showing for a Constitution which included a Bill of Rights that was indeed later adopted as amendments to the Constitution with ratification being prefaced on this understanding. Thankfully the anti-Constitutionalists were defeated, but their critically important Bill of Rights was not.
The lesson in the story of our Constitution lies in its birth out of necessity, its hard fought battle for ratification, its limitations (the amendments) and its genius in its unique, breathing ability to adapt to the ever changing world. Without the Constitution (as the failing Articles of Confederation showed), there was no hope for America to lay a bedrock foundation for unity and prosperity. George Washington, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Marshall were all correct in their assessment for a strong, national government with checks and balances. The anti-Constitutionalists were right in curbing the abuses of power by protecting the rights of every citizen with the Bill of Rights. This country needs to remind itself, that it is not a police state. Government exists for the prosperity of man, and not the other way around. A good judge will carefully and faithfully defend our laws and the Bill of Rights, with the particular vigilance of the anti-Constitutionalists for our rights.
(We expect our President to have good relations with important agencies. This is just a picture showing where political pressures can intersect with politics.)
Modern politicians seek popular endorsement by public displays of support for the police. Everyone supports the police when they are performing their jobs satisfactorily, this is a given. Politicians and judges are elected to protect our rights, minimize governmental intrusion, foster healthy economies and protect the public welfare. Judges should not first question how their legal rulings will reflect with the police before making correct decisions based in law. Unfortunately the lines get blurred too easily when pandering to political pressures. Let judges and politicians remember their first obligation is to support the rights of the hard fought, sacred Constitution.
