DOCSLIB.ORG

James Madison and "The Federalist Papers."

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
James Madison and DOCUMENT RESUME ED 322 083 SO 030 251 AUTHOR Patrick, John J.; And Others TITLE James Madison andThe Federalist Papers." INSTITUTION ERIC Clearinghouse for Social Studies/Social Science Education, Bloomington, IN.; National Center for America's Founding Documents,, Boston, MA.; National Trust for Historic Preservation, Washington, D.C. SPONS AGENCY Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), Washington, DC. REPORT NO ISBN-0-941339-11-4 PUB DATE 90 CONTRACT RI88062009 GRANT R123B80011 NOTE 187p. AVAILABLE FROMPublications Manager, ERIC Clearinghouse for Social Studies/Social Science Education, Indiana University, 2805 East Tenth Street, Bloomington, IN 47408. PUB TYPE Guides - Classroom Use - Guides (For Teachers) (052) InforMation Analyses - ERIC Information Analysis Products (071) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC08 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Citizenship Education; *Constitutional History; Constitutional Law; Instructional Materials; Learning Activities; Political Issues; Political Science; Secondary Education; Social Studies; Teaching Methods; *United States History IDENTIFIERS *Federalist Papers; *Madison (James) ABSTRACT A collection of resources for high school history and government teachers and their students, this volume treatscore ideas on constitutional government in the United States. James Madison's ideas as found in "The Federalist Papers" are examined in conjunction with their counterpoints in essays of the Anti-Federalists. This volume contains three main sections. Part 1 includes threepapers that provide background information and ideas for teachers, "The Federalist Papers in the Curriculum" (John J. Patrick); "James Madison and the Founding of the Republic" (A. E. Dick Howard); and "The Constitutional Thought of the Anti-Federalists" (Murray Dry). Part 2 of the volume includes six lesson sets for high school students of U.S. history or government. Each lesson set consists ofa teaching plan and accompanying lessons for students. Part 3 contains 13 primary documents: 7 papers by Madison in "The Federalist"and 6 papers by leading Anti-Federalists. A selected annotated bibliography (Earl P. Bell) provides teachers and students with additional information on Madison and "The Federalist Papers." (DB) ***************************A************************?:***************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best tl,?..t can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** Madison (JamesAND THE 00 70 Federalist Papers iJOHN J.PATRICK 4 00 4. 4,s 0 -41.'Y U.S. OEPARTMENT OF EOUCATION fi Office of Educational Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION RESOURCESERIC) )is document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. 4 0 Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. s. .A", Points of view or opinions stated in this dal/. ADO0 official ti- ment do not necessarily represent 44,,, le OERI position or policy. ksN oz, tz) _N. I 4 .?. "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY 41,6> Zock-0, 3- tAs, "1Z it, --PvcCr12_kW. 0 0 10,11 TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES tr 4t INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)," O BESTCOPYAVAIABLE National Trust for Historic Preservation le 44% WITH 44, ERICClearinghouse for Social Studies/Social Science Education National Center for America's Founding Documents 121:0117112:=E._ James Madison and The FederalistPapers John J. Patrick National Trust for Historic Preservation Washington, DC in association with the ERIC Clearinghouse Social Studies/ Social Science Education, Indiana University and the National Center for America's Founding Documents, Boston University 1990 3 () This publication can be ordered from the following source: The Publications Manager ERIC Clearinghouse for Social Studies/ Social Science Education (ERIC/ChESS) Indiana University 2805 East Tenth Street Bloomington, Indiana 47408 (812) 855-3838 ISBN 0-941339-11-4 © 1990 by the National Trust for Historic Preservation. ERIC This publication was developed for the National Trust for Historic Preservation by the ERIC Clearinghouse for Social Studies/Social Science Education at Indiana University with sup- port from the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI) of the U.S. De- partment of Education, under contract no. RI88062009 and grant no. R123B80011. The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the positions or policies of OERI or the U.S. Department of Education. ERIC, Educational Resources Information Center, is an information system sponsored by the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, within th.? U.S. Department of Ed- ucation. 4 --=--_-_-:: Contents About the Authors iv About the National Trust for Historic Preservation v Acknowledgments vi Introduction 1 Part One: Background Papers 7 Paper 1. The Federalist Papers in the Curriculum 9 by John J. Patrick Paper 2. James Madison and the Founding of the Republic 17 by A.E. Dick Howard Paper 3. The Constitutional Thought of the Anti-Federalists 27 by Murray Dry Part Two: Lessons 33 Set I. The Federalist in the Debate on the Constitution 35 Set II. Majority Rule and Minority Rights in a Free Government 47 Set III. Federalism and Republicanism 59 Set IV. Separation of Powers and Limited Government 77 Set V. National Security and Personal Liberty 89 Set VI. James Madison, The Federalist, and the Bill of Rights 99 Part III: Documents 111 Seven Papers by Madison in The Federalist, Documents 1-7 113 Six Papers by Anti-Federalists, Documents 8-13 143 Select Annotated Bibliography 179 ERIC Resources 185 5 iv About the Authors joh.i J. Patrick, the principal author and editor of this work: is director of the Social Studies Devel- opment Center at Indiana University, where he is also a professor of education and director of the ERIC Clearinghouse for Social Studies/Social Science Ed- ucation. John Patrick is the author of the Introduction to this work, Background Paper 1, "The Federalist Pa- pers in the Curriculum," and Lessons 1-10 and 12. Earl P: Bell is chairperson, department of his- tory, the University of Chicago Laboratory Schools. He is the author of Lesson 11 and the Select Annotated Bibliography. Murray Dry is a professor of political science at Middlebury College. He is the author of Background Paper 3, "The Constitutional Thought of the Anti- Federalists." A.E. Dick Howard is the White Burkett Miller Professor of law and public affairs, the University of Virginia. He is the author of Background Paper 2, "James Madison and the Founding of the Republic." National Trust for Historic Preservation The National Trust for Historic Preservation is a private, nonprofit membership organization with more than 220,00 individual and 3,000 organiza- tional member.. The National Trust was chartered by the U.S. Congress in 1949 to encourage the public to participate in the preservation of America's his- tory and culture and to own historic properties. The National Trust provides technical advice and financial assistance to nonprofit organizations and public agencies to help them carry out preser- vation activities. It advocates the country's heritage in the courts and with legislative and regulatory agencies; and it operates special projects to show how a preservation approach can be a central or- ganizing principle in community revitalization and development. Montpelier, the home of James Madison, is one of seventeen historic properties operated by the Na- tional Trust. It extends to 2,700 acres in the Piedmont of Virginia. After eighty years in the ownership of the Madisons, end a further sixty years when it passed through the hands of six separate owners, it was purchased in 1901 by William du Pont. The du Pont family lived there for another eighty years, making many changes to the mansion and the land- scape; and in 1984, the estate was willed to the Na- tional Trust by Marion du Pont Scott. The property is currently being assessed for the creation of a master plan for the future. The planning process has been greatly aided by a substantial grant from the Congress through the Commission on the Bicentennial of the United States Constitution. These funds were matched by the General Assembly of Virginia. The combined funds will allow large- scale repairs to both the structure and infrastructure of the estate to be completed. Through gifts and grants, the du Pont family continues to support the preservation and restoration of the property. The National Trust promotes education of the public about the heritage of the United States, in- cluding the education of teachers and elementary and secondary school students. The Master Class Program at Montpelier is one of several educational programs sponsored or conducted by staff of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. The National Trust for Historic Preservation is located at 1785 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., Wash- ington, D.C. 20036; (202) 673-4000. vi Acknowledgments This publication was developed with the asFis- tance of participants in the first Master Class for Teachers Program at Montpelier. The participants helped in the conceptualization, planning, and eval- uation of this work. They are listed in the Introduction to this volume. Five of the participants were mem- bers of a curriculum planning team in preparation of this volume: Earl Bell, Louis Grigar, Carol Oliver, Richard Schubart, and Theodore Sharp. Kathleen Hunter deserves special recognition. She is director of Federal Programs and Education Initiatives at the National Trust for Historic Preser- vation. Ms. Hunter
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Minting America: Coinage and the Contestation of American Identity, 1775-1800
    ABSTRACT MINTING AMERICA: COINAGE AND THE CONTESTATION OF AMERICAN IDENTITY, 1775-1800 by James Patrick Ambuske “Minting America” investigates the ideological and culture links between American identity and national coinage in the wake of the American Revolution. In the Confederation period and in the Early Republic, Americans contested the creation of a national mint to produce coins. The catastrophic failure of the paper money issued by the Continental Congress during the War for Independence inspired an ideological debate in which Americans considered the broader implications of a national coinage. More than a means to conduct commerce, many citizens of the new nation saw coins as tangible representations of sovereignty and as a mechanism to convey the principles of the Revolution to future generations. They contested the physical symbolism as well as the rhetorical iconology of these early national coins. Debating the stories that coinage told helped Americans in this period shape the contours of a national identity. MINTING AMERICA: COINAGE AND THE CONTESTATION OF AMERICAN IDENTITY, 1775-1800 A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Miami University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Department of History by James Patrick Ambuske Miami University Oxford, Ohio 2006 Advisor______________________ Andrew Cayton Reader_______________________ Carla Pestana Reader_______________________ Daniel Cobb Table of Contents Introduction: Coining Stories………………………………………....1 Chapter 1: “Ever to turn brown paper
    [Show full text]
  • The Meaning of the Federalist Papers
    English-Language Arts: Operational Lesson Title: The Meaning of the Federalist Papers Enduring Understanding: Equality is necessary for democracy to thrive. Essential Question: How did the constitutional system described in The Federalist Papers contribute to our national ideas about equality? Lesson Overview This two-part lesson explores the Federalist Papers. First, students engage in a discussion about how they get information about current issues. Next, they read a short history of the Federalist Papers and work in small groups to closely examine the text. Then, student pairs analyze primary source manuscripts concerning the Federalist Papers and relate these documents to what they have already learned. In an optional interactive activity, students now work in small groups to research a Federalist or Anti-Federalist and role-play this person in a classroom debate on the adoption of the Constitution. Extended writing and primary source activities follow that allow students to use their understanding of the history and significance of the Federalist Papers. Lesson Objectives Students will be able to: • Explain arguments for the necessity of a Constitution and a bill of rights. • Define democracy and republic and explain James Madison’s use of these terms. • Describe the political philosophy underpinning the Constitution as specified in the Federalist Papers using primary source examples. • Discuss and defend the ideas of the leading Federalists and Anti-Federalists on several issues in a classroom role-play debate. (Optional Activity) • Develop critical thinking, writing skills, and facility with textual evidence by examining the strengths of either Federalism or Anti-Federalism. (Optional/Extended Activities) • Use both research skills and creative writing techniques to draft a dialogue between two contemporary figures that reflects differences in Federalist and Anti-Federalist philosophies.
    [Show full text]
  • The Executive Power Clause
    ARTICLE THE EXECUTIVE POWER CLAUSE JULIAN DAVIS MORTENSON† Article II of the Constitution vests “the executive power” in the President. Advocates of presidential power have long claimed that this phrase was originally understood as a term of art for the full suite of powers held by a typical eighteenth- century monarch. In its strongest form, this view yields a powerful presumption of indefeasible presidential authority in the arenas of foreign affairs and national security. This so-called Vesting Clause Thesis is conventional wisdom among constitutional originalists. But it is also demonstrably wrong. Based on a comprehensive review of Founding-era archives—including records of drafting, legislative, and ratication debates, committee les, private and ocial correspondence, diaries, newspapers, pamphlets, poetry, and other publications—this Article not only refutes the Vesting Clause Thesis as a statement of the original understanding, but replaces it with a comprehensive armative account of the clause that is both historically and theoretically coherent. † James G. Phillipp Professor of law, University of Michigan. Thanks to Nick Bagley, Josh Chafetz, Reece Dameron, Jo Ann Davis, Brian Finucane, Louis Fisher, David Gerson, Jonathan Gienapp, Monica Hakimi, Jason Hart, Don Herzog, Kian Hudson, Daniel Hulsebosch, Rebecca Ingber, Andrew Kent, Gary Lawson, Marty Lederman, Tom McSweeney, Henry Monaghan, Bill Novak, David Pozen, Richard Primus, Daphna Renan, Jed Shugerman, Matt Steilen, Valentina Vadi, Matt Waxman, John Witt, Ilan Wurman, and Mariah Zeisberg, as well as participants in the Georgetown Law School Legal History Workshop, the Hofstra Law School Faculty Workshop, the Hugh & Hazel Darling Originalism Works-in-Progress Conference, the McGeorge School of Law Faculty Workshop, the Michigan Law School Governance Workshop, the University of Michigan Legal History Workshop, and the University of Michigan Atlantic History Seminar, for helpful comments on earlier drafts.
    [Show full text]
  • Alexander Hamilton to John Jay on African-American Soldiers (March, 14, 1779)
    Alexander Hamilton to John Jay on African-American Soldiers (March, 14, 1779) On March 14, 1779, Alexander Hamilton wrote this letter to John Jay regarding the recruitment of black soldiers. Hamilton expressed his opinion that former slaves might prove even better soldiers than the whites. Unlike many of his contemporaries, he rejected prejudices about the natural abilities of African-Americans and attributed any of their deficiencies to their social condition as slaves. As you read the letter, consider why Hamilton advocated giving the slaves "their freedom with their muskets" and what effect he thought this would have on slaves throughout the South. How did he propose to overcome the objections of slaveowners? Why was his plan rejected by congress? Col Laurens, who will have the honor of delivering you this letter, is on his way to South Carolina, on a project, which I think, in the present situation of affairs there, is a very good one and deserves every kind of support and encouragement. This is to raise two three or four batalions of negroes; with the assistance of the government of that state, by contributions from the owners in proportion to the number they possess. If you should think proper to enter upon the subject with him, he will give you a detail of his plan. He wishes to have it recommended by Congress to the state; and, as an inducement, that they would engage to take those batalions into Continental pay. It appears to me, that an expedient of this kind, in the present state of Southern affairs, is the most rational, that can be adopted, and promises very important advantages.
    [Show full text]
  • The Federalist Papers: # 10, # 51, and # 78 Federalist No. 10
    1 The Federalist Papers: # 10, # 51, and # 78 Federalist No. 10 The Same Subject Continued: The Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection From the New York Packet. Friday, November 23, 1787. Author: James Madison To the People of the State of New York: AMONG the numerous advantages promised by a well-constructed Union, none deserves to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction. The friend of popular governments never finds himself so much alarmed for their character and fate, as when he contemplates their propensity to this dangerous vice. He will not fail, therefore, to set a due value on any plan which, without violating the principles to which he is attached, provides a proper cure for it. The instability, injustice, and confusion introduced into the public councils, have, in truth, been the mortal diseases under which popular governments have everywhere perished; as they continue to be the favorite and fruitful topics from which the adversaries to liberty derive their most specious declamations. The valuable improvements made by the American constitutions on the popular models, both ancient and modern, cannot certainly be too much admired; but it would be an unwarrantable partiality, to contend that they have as effectually obviated the danger on this side, as was wished and expected. Complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and private faith, and of public and personal liberty, that our governments are too unstable, that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Gloss: a Primer
    HISTORICAL GLOSS: A PRIMER Alison L. LaCroix In the separation of powers section of the constitutional law canon, no case dominates discussion more than Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer.1 The case is distinguished not only by its evocatively indus- trial, midcentury sobriquet, “the Steel Seizure Case,” but by the num- ber of talismanic phrases that it injected into the constitutional law conversation. “Zone of twilight,” “imperatives of events and contem- porary imponderables,” and the summing of executive and legislative powers through “plus” and “minus” operations all appear in the con- currence by Justice Robert Jackson that has come to be understood as the “law” of Youngstown.2 In contrast both to Justice Jackson’s scheme of assessing presiden- tial power in light of specific instances of congressional action, and to the categorical distinction between executive and legislative power en- dorsed in Justice Hugo Black’s majority opinion, Justice Felix Frank- furter offered his own Delphic addition to the permissible sources of presidential power. Rejecting the “inadmissibly narrow conception of American constitutional law” that would hew only to “the words of the Constitution” and ignore “the gloss which life has written upon them,” Justice Frankfurter added a third source of presidential authority to Justice Black’s Constitution and Justice Jackson’s Constitution-plus- Congress.3 This “gloss on ‘executive Power’ vested in the President by § 1 of Art. II”4 stemmed from “a systematic, unbroken, executive prac- tice, long pursued to the knowledge of the Congress and never before questioned.”5 Over time, such practices had become “part of the struc- ture of our government.”6 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Professor of Law, University of Chicago Law School.
    [Show full text]
  • Twenty-Third Day
    TWENTY-THIRD DAY MORNING SESSION. defeating or negativing directly or indirectly the regulation of the traffic by a license herein pro­ TUESDAY, February 20, 1912. vided for. The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was AGAINST LICENSE. called to order by the president and opened with prayer No license to traffic in intox:icating liquors shall by the Rabbi Joseph S. Kornfield, of Columbus, Ohio. hereafter be granted in this state; but the gener­ The journal of yesterday was read. al assembly may by law provide against the evils Mr. ANDERSON: I call for the special order to­ resulting therefrom. day, Proposal No. 151. lVIr. PRESIDENT: The journal has not yet been SECTION 2. At said election, a separate ballot approval. Are there any corrections? If none the shall be in the following form: journal will stand approved as reacl. INTOXICATING LIQUORS. SECOND READING OF PROPOSALS. Mr. KING: I offer an amendment. I For License. The PRESIDENT: The gentleman from lVIahoning [Mr. ANDERSON] calls up the special order Proposal No. ----- 151 and the member from Erie [Mr. KING] offers an I' Against License. amendment which the secretary will read. The secretary read the amendment as follows: Amend Proposal No. 151 by striking out all SECTION 3. Separate ballot boxes shall be pro­ after the word "Proposal" and inserting the fol­ vided for the reception of said ballots. lowing: SECTION 4. The voter shall indicate his choice "To submit substitute for schedule, section 18, by placing a cross-mark ,vithin the blank space op­ of the constitution.-Relatin~to licensing the traf­ posite the words "For License" if he desires to fic in intoxicating liquors.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lost Meaning of the Jury Trial Right†
    The Lost Meaning of the Jury Trial Right† * LAURA I APPLEMAN INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................397 I. THE SUPREME COURT AND THE HISTORICAL JURY RIGHT...................................400 A. JONES V. UNITED STATES...........................................................................401 B. APPRENDI V. NEW JERSEY ..........................................................................402 C. RING V. ARIZONA.......................................................................................403 D. BLAKELY V. WASHINGTON..........................................................................403 II. THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE JURY TRIAL RIGHT...............................................405 A. ENGLISH ORIGINS.....................................................................................406 B. COMMUNITY AND JURIES BEFORE THE REVOLUTION................................408 III. FROM LOCAL POWER TO THE COLLECTIVE JURY TRIAL RIGHT .........................414 A. LEGAL AND POLITICAL THEORY ...............................................................415 B. STATE JURY TRIAL RIGHTS ......................................................................421 C. CONSTITUTIONAL CODIFICATION OF THE JURY TRIAL...............................426 D. EROSION AND DECLINE ............................................................................439 IV. APPLYING THE COLLECTIVE JURY RIGHT TO THE BENCH TRIAL .......................440 A. THE POWER SHIFT TO THE TRIAL JUDGE
    [Show full text]
  • Splitting Sovereignty: the Legislative Power and the Constitution's Federation of Independent States
    Splitting Sovereignty: The Legislative Power and the Constitution's Federation of Independent States JAMES T. KNIGHT II* ABSTRACT From the moment the Constitutional Convention of 1787 ended and the Framers presented their plan to ªform a more perfect Union,º people have debated what form of government that union established. Had the thirteen sepa- rate states surrendered their independence to form a new state stretching from New England to Georgia, or was their individual sovereignty preserved as in the Articles of Confederation? If the states remained sovereign in some respect, what did that mean for the new national government? I propose that the original Constitution would have been viewed as establish- ing a federation of independent, sovereign states. The new federation possessed certain limited powers delegated to it by the states, but it lacked a broad power to legislate for the general welfare and the protection of individual rights. This power, termed ªthe legislative powerº by Enlightenment thinkers, was viewed as the essential, identifying power of a sovereign state under the theoretical framework of eighteenth-century political philosophy. The state constitutions adopted prior to the national Constitutional Convention universally gave their governments this broad legislative power rather than enumerate speci®c areas where the government could legislate. Of the constitutional documents adopted prior to the federal Constitution, only the Articles of Confederation provides such an enumeration. In this note, I argue that, against the background of political theory and con- stitutional precedent, a government lacking the full legislative power would not have been viewed as sovereign in its own right.
    [Show full text]
  • Do Citizen Votes on Taxes and Laws Violate the Constitution’S Requirement of a “Republican Form of Government?”
    DO CITIZEN VOTES ON TAXES AND LAWS VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION’S REQUIREMENT OF A “REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT?” by Robert G. Natelson IP-12-2012 October 2012 727 East 16th Avenue • Denver, Colorado 80203 www.IndependenceInstitute.org • 303-279-6536 • 303-279-4176 fax EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Opponents of popular participation in government have long argued that when a state constitution or legislature permits the people to vote on revenue measures and other laws, this puts the state out of compliance with the U.S. Constitution’s Guarantee Clause: the requirement at all states have a “Republican Form of Government.” Traditionally, their argument has been that the Constitution draws a sharp distinction between a republic and a democracy, and that citizen initiatives and referenda are too democratic to be republican. Recently, a group of plaintiffs sued in federal court, challenging Colorado’s Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) relying on a variation of this theory. In this Issue Paper, Professor Rob Natelson, Senior Fellow in Constitutional Jurisprudence and the author of the most important scholarly article on the Guarantee Clause, sets the record straight. Marshaling evidence from Founding-Era sources and from the words of the Founders themselves, he shows that the phrase “Republican Form of Government” permits citizen lawmaking—and that, in fact, most of the governments on the Founders’ list of republics included far more citizen lawmaking than is permitted in Colorado or any other American state. He further shows that the principal purpose of the Guarantee Clause was not to restrict popular government, but to protect popular government by forestalling monarchy.
    [Show full text]
  • Co Gressional Record. Senate. 911'
    1912. CO GRESSIONAL RECORD._SENATE. 911' By l\Ir. DICKDISON: A bill (H. R. 27456) for the relief of By :\Ir. · MERRITT : Petition of Rev. James A. Perry and James 1\1. l\Iock; to the Committee on Milit:iry Affairs. other , of Champlain, N. Y., and of Ilev. C. E. Torrance ancl Also, a bill (H. R. 27457) granting an incre e of pension to others, of Chazy, N. Y., fayoring the pa.,sage of the Kenyo.n­ James K. Dickinson; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. Sheppard bill, preventing the shipment of liquor into dry Also, a bill (H. R. 27458) granting an increase of pen ion territory; to the. Co-mmittee on the Judiciary. to Robert A. White; to the Committee oti Invalid Pensions. By Mr. SBUIONS: Petition of 34 residents of Silver Spring , By lUr. HINDS: A bill (H. R. 2:7459) granting a pension to N. Y., favoring the passage of the Kenyon-Sheppard bill, pre­ Barbara Hender on; to the Committee on Pensions. Yenting the shipment of liquor into dry territory; to the Com­ By l\1r. LA.FEAN: A bill (H. R. 27460) "'ranting an increase mittee on the Judicia.ry. of pension to David F. Forney; to the Committee on Im·ulid By l\fr. S:\HTH of Michigan ~ Petition of 49 members of the Pensions. Congregational Christian Endeavor of Kalµ.mazoo, Mich., fayor­ By Mr. LITTLEPAGE: A bill (H. R. 274G1) grunting an ill-­ ing the passage of the Kenyon-Sheppard liquor bill, preventing crease of pension to Alleu T. Landress; to the Committee on the shipme11t of liquor into dry territory; to the Committee on Inyali · Pensions.
    [Show full text]
  • Updating New York's Constitutional Environmental Rights
    Pace Law Review Volume 38 Issue 1 Symposium Edition 2017 Article 9 September 2017 Updating New York’s Constitutional Environmental Rights Nicholas A. Robinson Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/plr Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Environmental Law Commons, Natural Resources Law Commons, and the State and Local Government Law Commons Recommended Citation Nicholas A. Robinson, Updating New York’s Constitutional Environmental Rights, 38 Pace L. Rev. 151 (2017) Available at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/plr/vol38/iss1/9 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at DigitalCommons@Pace. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pace Law Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Pace. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ROBINSON.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 10/24/17 4:20 PM Updating New York’s Constitutional Environmental Rights By Nicholas A. Robinson* Every twenty years, the New York State Constitution mandates a public decision on whether or not to conduct elections for delegates to convene in a convention to rewrite the constitution.1 2017 presents New Yorkers again with this question.2 As voters begin to contemplate what their government should do to prepare for the impacts of climate change, the 2017 ballot opens the door for New York to recognize an environmental right as a preferred way to do so. This article examines the issues that a constitutional convention will encounter as it may debate how best to update protection of New York’s environment.
    [Show full text]