Case 1 Some of the advantages for the federal government establishing a national bank is that it would allow them a place to store their government funds, issue currency and collect taxes. States felt threatened by a national bank because it would take the local bank 's business by competing with them.The state also thought the people inside the national bank were corrupt, and that the federal government was exerting too much power over them by attempting to curtail the state practice of issuing more paper money than they were able to redeem on demand. Yes the United States government has the authority to establish a national bank because that clause allowed them to do what is necessary and proper, and congress needed a way to carry out their …show more content…
The government twisted that phrase saying that it didn 't violate that amendment when in reality most of the time the separate areas/facilities of colored people were never equal in compared to what the whites …show more content…
The argument I would make that flag burning threatens to cause violence and should be illegal is that there are radical patriotic Americas that would become offended because of the troops fighting for our country and that the flag symbolizes our nation and therefore disrespecting the nation.The argument that I would make and that I personally agree with is that we should protect flag burning because it is our freedom of expression and speech to disagree with the government or show dislike of it. Also the government shouldn 't force its citizens to show unity by not being able to burn the flag because then we aren 't expressing our opinions and the nation would become a dictatorship. Making it illegal to burn the flag is the equivalent of how Kim Jong-un forces his citizens to worship
Andrew Jackson was a strict constitutional constructionist, he felt it was his duty to guard what he believed to be the constitution’s spirit, this is carried out when he handles South Carolina’s Nullification Crisis. Jackson makes a strong statement by passing the “1833 Force Bill”, that the position of John C. Calhoun and also his home state (South Carolina) are unconstitutional. It is also made clear by Jackson that he, as president, is prepared to back up his ideals, even with force, if necessary. By his handling of “The 1832-1841 Bank War”, Jackson further advanced his demanding constructionist position. Looking in Article I, section 8 of the Constitution, authority to create a national bank given to congress is nowhere to be found. Jackson effectively takes apart what he had viewed as a “monopoly of the foreign and domestic exchange” that had not been “compatible with justice, with sound policy, or with the Constitution of our country.” (Document B)
With George Washington is agreeing with the plan to build the bank with Alexander Hamilton, they had to decide where it was going to be built. Alexander Hamilton and George Washington decide to place the National Bank in Philadelphia. This provided three hundred plus jobs and more tax collector offices. After Alexander Hamilton and George Washington agreed on Philadelphia they had to decide how the system of the bank was going to work. The bank was going to be used for loans, accepting deposits, issuing banknotes and purchasing securities. Five out of the twenty five were picked by the United States and the twenty others were picked by the private investors. The bank had to have investors to provide loans to consumers to make a profit on the fees and
Jefferson believed the creation of the National Bank was unconstitutional. In the article “Jefferson and the Louisiana Purchase” the author argues, “While it a National Bank was not expressly mentioned in the Constitution, Hamilton felt that the elastic clause (Art I., Sect. 8, Clause 18) gave the government the power to create such a body. Jefferson completely disagreed. He felt that all powers given to the National Government were enumerated. If they were not expressly mentioned in the Constitution then they were reserved to the states” (http://americanhistory.about.com). But under Hamilton’s National Bank, the United States had developed the financial credit necessary to receive a loan large enough for the Louisiana Purchase. With that being stated I am sure anyone can see why this would cause a problem for Jefferson if he believed the creation of the National Bank was unconstitutional. Jefferson believed that the Constitution was to be strictly interpreted and that government should act within the stated boundaries. Jefferson also favored limited government and believed that congress should be restricted to enumerated powers listed in the Constitution. The major difference between Jefferson and Hamilton concerning executive power rests with Jefferson’s faith in the body politic as represented by the
Just because the amendments were in place and the government had the provisions to enforce them, the government did not. It could also be argued that just because one political party forced the amendments in to Congress, does not mean that the states have to enforce and protect the rights of all citizens. There is also the argument that the citizens actually took power away from the government because they did not agree with the new amendments. After all, there is no government if the citizens choose to ignore the laws. Either way it is looked at, for a long period of time, the states, government, and citizens got away with treating minorities how they want to treat them, which of course was to keep them
This bank held government money and controlled the economy by making it easier for local banks to borrow money from it to loan it to manufacturers and factories. As the idea arose the cabinet, Jefferson protested that such a bank was unconstitutional because it favored the north over the south since the bank did not loan money to farmers for land expansions. Being true as it is, the bank drastically boosted our economy and had a great future for our nation. Since it was unconstitutional, a compromise said that the bank would only be funded for 20 years. So as soon as Andrew Jackson was elected, he destroyed the bank. In response to this, our nation suddenly falls into a major depression. No one had jobs and the economy was dying. This showed the brilliance of the national bank and how much it helped our economy. Adding onto this, the bank began the formation of the Federalist and Democratic
To the Majority Opinion it’s a flag of our nation but to the Dissenting opinion its means more than just a flag. It means “White signifies purity and innocence, Red, hardiness & velour, and Blue, the color of the Chief (the broad band above the stripes) signifies vigilance, perseverance & justice." In this case the Dissenting opinion gave reasons why flag burning should be banned. Eventually Congress passed the Flag Protection Act of 1989. The Act banned flag burning regardless of whether the person burning the flag intended to cause offense to
In 1913, Wilson and Congress passed the Federal Reserve Act to make a decentralized national bank containing twelve local offices. By and large, all the private banks in every district possessed and worked that separate area's branch. In any case, the new Federal Reserve Board had the last say in choices influencing all branches, including setting financing costs and issuing money. This new managing an account framework settled national funds and credit and helped the monetary framework survive two world wars and the Great
One such issue was that of the National debt and creating a National Bank. In 1790, Alexander Hamilton proposed that Congress should establish a national bank, in which private investors could buy stock, could print paper money, and keep government finances safe. Washington signed the bill establishing a national bank and started a strong foundation for a thriving economy and a stable currency.
After the first War for Independence, The United States was approximately $52 million in debt. Due to having such bad financial problems, the United States created a national Bank to create one unified currency, to take away all state debts, and to issue loans to the people to promote growth. This National Bank was created by Alexander Hamilton who was a Federalist, and once Jefferson came to be the President, he continued the idea of the national bank because it was helping to reduce the national debt. The primary reason for the National Bank being a representation of a Federalist idea was because since it was issuing loans to people it was able to promote industrial growth which was one of the main goals of the Federalist party. From Jefferson continuing the use of the National Bank thru his presidency he demonstrates his need to continue a loose constructionist idea.
Ferguson trial was a court case about a black man by the name of Homer Adolph Plessy. He was arrested for refusing to not ride in the ‘colored’ railway coach. Plessy had enough of the segregation so he decided to sit up in the white coach. However, it didn’t go well for him and he was arrested. On February 23, 1869, the Louisiana legislature passed a law prohibiting segregation on public transportation. The Government used the term ‘separate but equal’ as an excuse for not letting the blacks sit up with the whites. The supreme court case of Plessy v. Ferguson upheld a ‘separate but equal’ doctrine. “Laws permitting, and even requiring, their separation in places where they are liable to be brought into contract do not necessarily imply the inferiority of either race to the other. (Plessy v. Ferguson). So the blacks and white were now equal, but they couldn’t be together. The government said that the everything was equal when the school that the black children were in had old textbooks when the white school had new textbooks. The blacks and whites were separate but not so much
The burning of an American flag is not necessarily anti-American or unpatriotic. Sometimes, the greatness and majesty of the flag is better portrayed in the powerful political and societal statement of destroying it. This act can convey the feeling of the American people that their government is not the body it should be or that it is not doing the will of the people. This is probably one of the most emotional actions they can take to get the government's attention. Some of these protestors may even love the flag as much as those who are for banning flag burning, but the burners want to emphasize the seriousness of their complaint. The act of burning a flag may be the people's way of telling the government that it is co...
Flag Burning can be and usually is a very controversial issue. Many people are offended by the thought of destroying this country's symbol of liberty and freedom. During a political protest during the 1984 Republican Convention, Gregory Lee Johnson was arrested for burning an American flag. Years later in 1989, Johnson got the decision overturned by the United States Supreme Court. In the same year, the state of Texas passed the Flag Protection Act, which prohibited any form of desecration against the American flag. This act provoked many people to protest and burn flags anyway. Two protestors, Shawn Eichman and Mark Haggerty were charged with violating the law and arrested. Both Eichman and Haggerty appealed the decision because the law was inconsistent with the first amendment to the Constitution. The right to petition the government for a redress of grievances is protected by the first amendment of the Constitution. Burning American flags and other such actions are not treasonous and should no be treated as so, as long as these actions are done to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
The Bank of the United States was an idea proposed by Alexander Hamilton. This bank would be used to create a unified currency, handle the government treasury, pay off federal debts, and give out loans to businesses that would stimulate commerce in the country. Overall, the bank would stabilize America’s problem with its finances. This idea was opposed by the Anti-Federalists because they believed the bank would only give loans to the wealthy and be of no benefit to the common man. The Federalists saw this proposal as a great way to improve economy and establish good credit with other countries. Also, the money given out in loans would trickle down as savings for all people and in reality, would end up benefiting everyone. I would agree with the Federalist decision to create a bank due to the improvements it would bring to America.
The issue of whether or not America should have a National Bank is one that is debated throughout the whole beginning stages of the modern United States governmental system. In the 1830-1840’s two major differences in opinion over the National Bank can be seen by the Jacksonian Democrats and the Whig parties. The Jacksonian Democrats did not want a National Bank for many reasons. One main reason was the distrust in banks instilled in Andrew Jackson because his land was taken away. Another reason is that the creation of a National Bank would make it more powerful than...
“It isn't against the law to burn a cross or any other religious symbol—yet it would be against the law to burn a flag, if these flag amendment folks have their way” (Levendosky). If you are allowed to buy a cross and go home and burn it why should you be held to a law that is the same as that. Making a flag more than what it should be is what is making the argument such a big deal. “Chief Justice William Rehnquist, in a dissent fifteen years ago, when the Court refused to hold flag burning a crime, wrote that "the true nature of the state's interest in this case is not only one of preserving 'the physical integrity of the flag' but also one of preserving the flag as an important symbol of nationhood and unity. . . . It is the character not the cloth of the flag that the states seek to protect" (Garbus). This quote represents taking this case too far. This case should be held between a couple of people in the government, but they should have a vote that declares what's what. And if people don’t like what happens then you can keep it to