Framers Argument Analysis

In an article by Gienapp (2015), he stated that as the U.S. was being created, the Framers explored various types of government. The first was the Article of the Confederation which had a lot of problems and weaknesses that needed to be fixed, it required a succession of long debates, and it caused a great deal of regional conflict. Because of this, in the hopes that it will solve most of the problems, the Framers in 1787 began drafting the Constitution as well as signed it which replaced the Article of the Confederation. There was a push for ratification of the Constitution by two parties, one supporting it while the other opposed it. What it boiled down to was there was a split by two groups, the Federalist and Anti-Federalist who verbally

The inclusion of the Bill of Rights was one of the points in question that the two parties argued about. The Federalist believed that the Bill of Rights should not be added to the Constitution because as it stood, it restricted the government and not the people. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalist asserted that the Constitution gave the central government too much authority, and it would run the risk of oppression for the people if the Bill of Rights were not added (Sphohn & Hemmens, 2012). It is important to note that ultimately both sides made the concessions and declared their willingness to take up the matter of the array of amendments which would become known as the Bill of Rights. From my understanding, if it were not for this compromise, the Constitution may never have been affirmed by the States. Even though the Anti-Federalist were thwarted in the prevention of the enactment of the Constitution, their efforts were accountable for the establishment and implementation of the Bill of

What resulted was an ongoing escalation in federal caseloads and the ensuing appeals to the Supreme Court which directly outpaced the capability of the Justices to keep up with the load of work. To that end, the Circuit Trial Courts were abolished in 1911 by Congress which in turn combined all trial jurisdiction in the district courts thus disposing of the necessity for regular circuit appearances of the Justices for the Supreme Court. However, Congress in the year of 1925, strongly limited the right of systematic appeal to the Supreme Court so that the Justices owing to the acquiesce of certiorari, will be able to decide more than half of the cases that will come before the Court. Based on this information the Court of Appeals grew commensurate in importance as the majority of the decisions became the ending authority in the federal courts. On the other hand, the Supreme Court evolved into the court we know today, with the focal point of constitutional inquiry and the determination of adverse findings in the appeals court (Sphohn & Hemmens,