Articles Of Confederation Vs Constitution Dbq Analysis
How different would the United States be today if the country was ruled by a dictator? In Philadelphia, during the summer of 1787, there was a meeting of fifty-five delegates to fix the national government. The delegates wanted to replace the weak Articles of Confederation with a strong government. The Articles of Confederation were America’s first attempt at a Constitution, but it had no chief executive or court system. The delegates knew they needed to frame a new government, but the challenge was to create one without anyone having too much power. Their main objective of the meeting was to fix these issues, but the delegates worked diligently to make sure there would not be a person or group of people taking control. They wanted to avoid
…show more content…
James Madison wrote, “Liberty requires that the three great departments of power should be separate and distinct.” The three branches were called the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. All legislative powers were given to the Congress, which contained the Senate and House of Representatives. The executive powers were given to the President. The judicial decisions were made by judges within the Supreme Court (Doc B). The split of control allowed for each branch to be equal to the others. The three branches stopped the possibility of a tyranny of happening with a separation of powers. The definition of tyranny is that all the power is given to one person or group, which is the complete opposite of what was written in the …show more content…
They came up with an idea called checks and balances. James Madison wrote, “The three branches should not be so far separated as to have no constitutional control over each other.” Checks and balances were created to make sure each branch could check the others and have some involvement in the decisions of the other branches (Doc C). Some examples of the control they have are that, the President can nominate the judges, but the court can declare presidential acts unconstitutional. Congress can impeach the President, but the President can veto Congressional legislation (Doc C). This was a success in stopping the dominance of one branch over another, and checks and balances allowed each branch to have a say in final
James Madison wrote, “Liberty requires that the three great departments of power should be separate and distinct.” The three branches were called the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. All legislative powers were given to the Congress, which contained the Senate and House of Representatives. The executive powers were given to the President. The judicial decisions were made by judges within the Supreme Court (Doc B). The split of control allowed for each branch to be equal to the others. The three branches stopped the possibility of a tyranny of happening with a separation of powers. The definition of tyranny is that all the power is given to one person or group, which is the complete opposite of what was written in the …show more content…
They came up with an idea called checks and balances. James Madison wrote, “The three branches should not be so far separated as to have no constitutional control over each other.” Checks and balances were created to make sure each branch could check the others and have some involvement in the decisions of the other branches (Doc C). Some examples of the control they have are that, the President can nominate the judges, but the court can declare presidential acts unconstitutional. Congress can impeach the President, but the President can veto Congressional legislation (Doc C). This was a success in stopping the dominance of one branch over another, and checks and balances allowed each branch to have a say in final