Why? British victory in French and Indian War results in more territory which means more problems and more costs.

Such as? Proclamation of 1763 to halt westward settlement, Quartering Act to support British troops, and taxes (Sugar, Stamp, Townshend, etc.)

Why? ◦ 150 years of “salutary

neglect” ◦ King’s tyranny (unjust use

of government power)◦ “no taxation without

representation” How?

◦ Boycotts ◦ Propaganda (Boston

Massacre)◦ committees of

correspondence ◦ Protests (Boston Tea

Party)

Thomas Paine writes Common Sense convincing Americans that peace with Great Britain is not possible

Thomas Jefferson and others write the Declaration of Independence

Influenced by English philosopher John Locke’s idea of “inalienable rights” (rights that are natural to all and can’t be taken away)

`

http://www.history.com/shows/america-the-story-of-us/videos/american-revolution

American Revolution Activity

Each state had its own Constitution◦ Separated powers of government into

executive, legislative, and judicial branches

◦ Typically limited voting rights to white men who paid taxes or owned a certain amount of property.

◦ Only New Jersey gave rights women and African Americans who owned property.

◦ 0 of the original 13 states outlawed slavery, and all states south of Pennsylvania denied slaves equal rights as human beings.

Drafted in 1777 when many Americans feared a powerful national government.

AoC created a framework for a loose confederation of states.◦ Each state would often develop its own rules /

regulations. Congress could only declare war, negotiate with

foreign countries, establish a postal system, and settle disputes between the states.◦ It had no power to tax◦ Did not set up an executive branch to carry

out the laws or a judicial branch to settle legal questions.

Land Ordinance of 1785 set up a system for surveying and dividing land in the new territory.

1787, Northwest Ordinance to specify how these western lands would be governed. ◦ When a territory had 5,000

free adult men it could elect a legislature.

◦ When the population reached 60,000 free inhabitants the legislations could write a constitution and form a government. If Congress approved

both, the territory would become a state.

Congress’s weakness Debt Trade Interstate commerce Tariffs

The delegates were influenced by John Locke’s ideas about natural rights.

Montesquieu, another Enlightenment thinker favored a three part government with separation of powers, that work together in a system of checks and balances limiting the power of the others.

The Great Compromise Combination of the New

Jersey Plan and the Virginia Plan.

◦ Led to the 3/5 Compromise Three Branches of Gov’t

Separation of Powers Established a system of

checks and balances Bill of Rights would be

later added after Anti – Federalist concerns.

Strict Constructionist vs. Judicial Interpretation◦ Strict Constructionist - interpreting the Constitution based on a

literal and narrow definition of the language without reference to the differences in conditions when the Constitution was written and modern conditions, inventions, and societal changes. By contrast "broad construction" looks to what someone thinks was the "intent" of the framers' language and expands and interprets the language extensively to meet current standards of human conduct and complexity of society. Strict construction is the opposite of judicial interpretation, which permits a

term to be reasonably and fairly evaluated so as to implement the object and purpose of the document. Advocates of strict construction believe judges must exercise restraint by refusing to expand the law through implication.

◦ Judicial Interpretation - refers to how a judge interprets laws. Different judges interpret the laws of their state or the country in different ways. Some judges are said to interpret laws in ways that cannot be sustained by the plain meaning of the law; at other times, some judges are said to "legislate from the bench". These judicial behaviors are sometimes referred to as judicial activism, which is contrasted to judicial restraint as a way of interpreting both what laws say and how much freedom judges have to create new laws from the bench.