Contending For The Constitution

Contending for the Constitution is a companion volume to the popular work Defending the Declaration. As author Gary Amos did concerning the Declaration, Mark Beliles and Doug Anderson present their case that the Constitution is based on biblical principles and Christian influence. Using primary source evidence, the authors give an easy-reading history of the Constitutional Convention and the Founder's emphasis on religion being necessary for its success. They show how the spirit of the Constitution has greatly diminished today and issue a call for its defense. -- from the publisher.

"examines how the rule of law is understood conceptually and pragmatically-both on its own terms and as part of post-conflict state-building efforts. It examines thinner, more process-orientated understandings of the rule of law as well as thicker, more substantive conceptualizations with additional political, social, and economic components. While both approaches are worthwhile, I argue that a minimalist conception of rule of law offers the most appropriate standard for assessing progress in judicial state-building after conflict"--

Joel Bakan argues that the Canadian Charter of Rights (1982) has failed to promote social justice because it is administered by a conservative judiciary and because social and economic conditions constantly interfere with its principles.

There is a great difficulty in the way of a writer who attempts to sketch a living Constitution-a Constitution that is in actual work and power. The difficulty is that the object is in constant change. An historical writer does not feel this difficulty: he deals only with the past; he can say definitely, the Constitution worked in such and such a manner in the year at which he begins, and in a manner in such and such respects different in the year at which he ends; he begins with a definite point of time and ends with one also. But a contemporary writer who tries to paint what is before him is puzzled and a perplexed: what he sees is changing daily. He must paint it as it stood at some one time, or else he will be putting side by side in his representations things which never were contemporaneous in reality.

He who can change the Constitution controls the Constitution. So who does control the Constitution? The answer has always been: “the people.” The people control the Constitution via the Article V amending process outlined in the Constitution itself. Changes can only be made through Article V and its formal procedures. Article V has always provided a means of perfecting the Constitution in an explicit, democratically authentic, prudent, and deliberative manner. In addition to changing the Constitution Article V also allowed the people to perfect and preserve their Constitution at the same time. In recent years Article V has come under attack by influential legal scholars who criticize it for being too difficult, undemocratic, and too formal. Such scholars advocate for ignoring Article V in favor of elite adaptation of the Constitution or popular amendment through national referendums. In making their case, critics also assume that Article V is an unimportant and expendable part of the Constitutional structure. One notable scholar called the Constitution “imbecilic” because of Article V. This book shows that, to the contrary, Article V is a unique and powerful extension of the American tradition of written constitutionalism. It was a logical extension of American constitutional development and it was a powerful tool used by the Federalists to argue for ratification of the new Constitution. Since then it has served as a means of “perfecting” the US Constitution for over 200 years via a wide range of amendments. Contrary to contemporary critics, the historical evidence shows Article V to be a vital element in the Constitutional architecture, not an expendable or ancillary piece. This book defends Article V against critics by showing that it is neither too difficult, undemocratic, nor too formal. Furthermore, a positive case is made that Article V remains the most clear and powerful way to register the sovereign desires of the American public with regard to alterations of their fundamental law. In the end, Article V is an essential bulwark to maintaining a written Constitution that secures the rights of the people against both elites and themselves.

The Congressional Record is the official record of the proceedings and debates of the United States Congress. It is published daily when Congress is in session. The Congressional Record began publication in 1873. Debates for sessions prior to 1873 are recorded in The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States (1789-1824), the Register of Debates in Congress (1824-1837), and the Congressional Globe (1833-1873)

"The book introduces and describes the principal characteristics of the Canadian constitution, including Canada's institutional structure and the principal drivers of Canadian constitutional development. The constitution is set in its historical context, noting especially the complex interaction of national and regional societies that continues to shape the constitution of Canada. The book argues that aspects of the constitution are best understood in 'agonistic' terms, as the product of a continuing encounter or negotiation, with each of the contending interpretations rooted in significantly different visions of the relationship among peoples and societies in Canada. It suggests how these agonistic relationships have, in complex ways, found expression in distinctive doctrines of Canadian constitutional law and how these doctrines represent approaches to constitutional legality that may be more widely applicable. As such, the book charts the Canadian expression of trans-societal constitutional themes: democracy; parliamentarism; the rule of law; federalism; human rights; and Indigenous rights, and describes the country that has resulted from the interplay of these themes"--...