Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Alexander Hamilton, only after the Constitution had been ratified, [19] argued for a broad interpretation which viewed spending as an enumerated power Congress could exercise independently to benefit the general welfare, such as to assist national needs in agriculture or education, provided that the spending is general in nature and does not ...
The wide interpretation of the scope of the Commerce Clause continued following the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which aimed to prevent business from discriminating against black customers. The Supreme Court issued several opinions supporting that use of the Commerce Clause.
[21] [22] This “broad” [12] or “liberal” [23] [24] interpretation swayed President Washington, who signed the bank bill on February 25, 1791. Hamilton's success in advancing his fiscal and financial schemes [5] moved Madison and Jefferson towards establishing the political foundations for a two-party system.
Alexander Hamilton, in Federalist 34 and his 1791 Report on Manufactures, argued for a broad interpretation which viewed spending as an enumerated power Congress could exercise independently to benefit the general welfare, such as to assist national needs in agriculture or education, provided that the spending is general in nature and does not ...
The purposive approach (sometimes referred to as purposivism, [1] purposive construction, [2] purposive interpretation, [3] or the modern principle in construction) [4] is an approach to statutory and constitutional interpretation under which common law courts interpret an enactment (a statute, part of a statute, or a clause of a constitution) within the context of the law's purpose.
The broad version of the major questions doctrine is a clear statement rule, saying that statutes must not be interpreted as delegating power to decide major questions unless the text clearly grants such power. The Supreme Court moved toward this approach in West Virginia v.
However, Missouri's potentially broad interpretation was circumscribed in the 1957 case, Reid v. Covert, when the Supreme Court held that treaties and the laws made pursuant to them must comply with the Constitution. The enforceability of treaties was further limited in the 2008 Supreme Court decision in Medellín v.
In the United States, strict constructionism is a particular legal philosophy of judicial interpretation that limits or restricts the powers of the federal government only to those expressly, i.e., explicitly and clearly, granted to the government by the United States Constitution.