‘Thur’oughly ‘Good’ Thoughts Concerning the U.S. Constitution In Thurgood Marshall’s “A Bicentennial View From the Supreme Court”, Thurgood Marshall argues that the United States Constitution bicentennial celebration should not be commemorated with narrow views concerning the birth of the document, but rather should be seen as a living document, one which has been dramatically altered to reflect the changing views or society. Born from this ideal, Marshall contends that the Constitution should be placed into perspective with events in U.S. history, which followed its inception. Marshall adds that society should neither view the Constitution as a flawless governmental charter, nor its “framers” as sheer geniuses. He instead points to the paper’s subsequent alterations, which helped it evolve to its current state. Marshall maintains that the framers were individuals who either compromised their own moral beliefs or were obvious hypocrites.
Marshall’s draws his logical conclusions from specific events in U.S. history. Marshall does not believe the United States is an impressive nation because of its Constitution and its founders, but rather it is only recently noble because of those individuals who “suffer[ed], stuggle[d], and sacrifice[d]” (Marshall 304) for freedom and turned the tide of popular opinion. Marshall views the bicentennial celebration as “oversimplified” and believes it it “overlook[s] the many other events that have been instrumental to our achievement as a nation” (Marshall 303).
The Essay on Frederick Douglass: Slave Life and His Constitution Views
Throughout reading “Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass”, one does not simply learn and discover the everyday average slave life style, Douglass incorporates his own mental philosophies as to how slavery and society is ran during that time by telling it from his own first person prospective, and he also uncovers the evils that slavery hides. Slaves during the antebellum of the ...
He discusses the obvious fundamental flaw with the Constitution: its deliberate exclusion of the abolition of slavery. Marshall argues that the slavery issue illustrated the corrupt understanding and forethought of the founding fathers and how they refused to address such a critical issue. In his essay, he makes two points concerning the founding fathers omission of the end of slavery. In order to preserve the union, the Constitutional framers compromised the economic benefits for both the northern and southern regions of the colonies versus the rights of slaves.
However, in the Constitution, the representatives openly referred to them and their constituents as “We the People” (Constitution).
The framers also advanced the principles from the Declaration of Independence that “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness” (Declaration).
However, Marshall ponders how these individuals, with their great wisdom, could one moment espouse the principles of personal freedom, and then condemn their fellow man to a life of servitude without the above stated rights. Marshall also questions how Gouverneur Morris, delegate from Pennsylvania, could openly denounce slavery, but hypocritically approve a government which allowed it. Nevertheless, Marshall does not place all fault with the framers. Observing the actions of the Supreme Court 70 and 170 years later, he concludes that the court continued the mistakes of the past. Marshall cites the court’s opinion in the Dread Scott case as an example of the continued ignorance of the legal system toward the black race. Marshall illustrates that Chief Justice Taney accepted the notion that the founding fathers were flawless because he took their opinions as pure fact. ” ‘We [Supreme Court] think they [slaves] are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included.They had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order’ ” (Marshall 303).
Marshall demonstrates that Taney and the Court made their decision on the basis of historical precedence. Instead of reevaluating the meaning of “all men are created equal”(Declaration) and the morality and humaneness of slavery, the Court merely reaffirmed a hypocritical idea of 70 years ago because of the narrow view of infallibility granted to the Constitutional framers, Marshall argues. Despite the addition of the 13th and 14th amendments, which ended slavery and quaranteed equal rights to all men, respectively, it was another 100 years before the Court eliminated the segregation that existed. Although Marshall continues to question the decisions of the Supreme Court, he brings to the forefront the legal and social principles, which have altered through time to permit the society that exists today. He does not view the first version of the Constitution as the factor for today’s equality. Rather, Marshall focuses on the greatness of the subsequent changes.
The Research paper on Constitution And Law In America
Constitution's Significance with Law in America The definition of constitution is the act or process of composing, setting up or establishing (Websters Dictionary online). When I think of constitution I think of our "founding father's", the ones who established our and function. I am reminded of why they came over here. I think of the Constitution as the mission statement for the American ...
To fully understand this, Marshall unionizes the legality concept. He states that blacks were “enslaved by law, emancipated by law, disenfranchised and segregated by law; and finally, they have begun to win equality by law” (Marshall 303).
It is here that Marshall makes his most important point and asks for perspective about the celebrations and that individuals realize the struggles of the individuals who yearned for freedom and the Constitutional vibrancy they helped create. Marshall sees that the Constitution is now used as a backdrop for equality because of the progresses society has made with its views about slavery and blacks. It is for these reasons that the Constitution is a great document, not because of the founding fathers.
Bibliography:
Works Cited “The Constitution of the United States of America”. 1787.
“Declaration of Independence”. 1776. Marshall, Thurgood. “A Bicentennial View From the Supreme Court”. The United States.
