What is the difference between a strict and loose interpretation of the constitution?
A strict interpretation of the Constitution states that the government of the United States holds only those powers specifically granted to it by the Constitution. A loose interpretation of the Constitution posits that the government of the United States hold all powers that are not specifically denied to it by the Constitution.
9 people found this useful
What is the difference between observation and interpretation?
Answer . Observation is what you see; interpretation is how you see it. Example, you see an object (observation) and you describe what it looks like to you (interpretation).
What is the difference between interpreter and translator?
Well , in computer terminology an interpreter is a translator which translates a source code line by line and executes it, while a translator is a big word it may have different types like compiler, interpreter, assembler etc.. Answer . In more specific language terms, an interpreter is a person who translates one language to another, for instance at the UN, where quick-wittedness and a good memory are attributes, whereas a translator converts a written work from from one language to another, where being methodical and having good research material to hand are advantages.
What is the Difference Between Strict Construction and Loose Construction?
Loose construction-means that the federal government can take reasonable actions that the constitution does not specifically forbid Strict construction- people who favor strict constitution think that that federal government should do only what the constitution specifically says it can doThe Loose Construction Theory is when federalists interpret theConstitution into things that are in favor of a stronger nationalgovernment. There are limitations involved.
What is the difference between information and interpretation?
Answer . information is some thing that gives you a overview of the matter and interpretation is how you apply the information or you can say the evaluation of the information
Did Hamilton support a loose interpretation of the constitution?
Yes he did. Hamilton supported a looser interpretation of the Constitution so that the central government could be strengthened at the expense of the state's rights. He believe that the government should be allowed to use the implied powers and the elastic clause from the Constitution to his advantage.
What are loose and strict constructions of the constitution and who favored each?
It's your interpretation of the constitution. The philosophy that allows narrow constitutional interpretation is called strict construction and the philosophy of broad constitutional interpretation is called loose construction. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison favored the strict constructions, and Alexander Hamilton favored the loose construction.
In a strict interpretation of the Constitution the federal government has only what power?
The federal government has only the power to do exactly as the Constitution says. In George Washington's Presidency Alexander Hamilton who believed in loose construction believed that because the Constitution did not say that creating a national bank was illegal, then it could be done. Thomas Jefferson a believer of a strict interpretation believed that if it was not said in the Constitution that the Federal Government could make a National Bank then it is not allowed. The idea of strict and loose interpretation is fought about even to this day.
What is the difference between strict and loose constructionists?
To answer your question, let me use the American Constitution as an example. Thomas Jefferson believed in a strict construction of the Constitution; that means, he believed people should follow exactly what was stated and allowed in the document. Anything not given to the federal government in the Constitution would be given to the states and the people. On the other hand, Alexander Hamilton believed in a loose construction of the Constitution; that means, he thought you could take whatever action you wanted, as long as the document did not specifically say you couldn't do it. So, a strict constructionist would feel the need to follow the specific instructions and rules of something, while a loose constructionist would feel it was acceptable to find a loophole, or do something not directly forbidden.
What is loose interpretation of the constitution?
The Constitution allows everything, unless it specifically forbids it. A loose view of the constitution simply means that one has a more liberal view of the rules and regulations present in the document. A strict view would imply that one views the constitution with a conservative approach, believing that the rules should be interpreted literally. Jefferson believed in a strict view of the constitution while he was an advisor. When he became president, his view changed; He supported a more loose view of the document in accordance with his policies. Hamilton, on the other hand, always supported a loose view of the living document.
What is a strict interpretation of the constitution?
The federal government has only the power to do exactly as the Constitution says. .
Why did Jefferson and the Republicans believe in strict Constitutional interpretation?
They didn't want someone coming in and making interpretations. Ifsomeone started doing that, then soon things would not be the same.
Why did the democratic republicans have a loose interpretation of the constitution?
Because the thought that by following it freely, that it would not be like a monarchy.
What are loose and strict constructions of the constitution?
It's your interpretation of the constitution. The philosophy that allows narrow constitutional interpretation is called strict construction and the philosophy of broad constitutional interpretation is called loose construction.
Why did the framers of the constitution prefer loose interpretation?
The framers of the Constitution understood that one document couldnot address every issue. They new they had to create a documentthat would be useful for centuries.
What is the difference between a strict interpreter and a loose interpreter?
A strict interpreter must change every word from the speakerslanguage to the listeners language. A loose interpreter has moreliberty to relay the message in the most efficient way withoutconcern of every word.
What is a difference between interpreter and compiler?
an interpreter converts the source code to object code by doing a line at a time while a compiler does all at once.
What party supported the strict interpretation of the constitution?
The Democratic Republicans, who were headed by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison (the Democratic Republicans later evolved into Democrats).
Why Did hamilton support a loose interpretation of the constitution?
not so much why but what loose stood for is why he was more loose than strict
What is the difference in loose and strict constitution?
. Loose construction : if the constitution said nothing about it we can do it. Strict construction : if the constitution said nothing about it we cant do anything about it.
Was marshall a strict interpreter of the constitution?
John Marshall is considered to have been a loose constructionist,rather than a strict constructionist. Marshall was the 4th ChiefJustice of the Supreme Court.
Differences between interpreter and compiler?
interpreter is involved in conversion of source code to object code line to line whereas the compiler converts the source code to the object after the entire program is written
What does a strict interpretation of the constitution mean?
It means that the federal government has only the power to do exactly as the Constution says.. source: wikianswers on another page!
What was strict vs loose construction of constitution?
Strict construction is a legal philosophy of judicial interpretation in which the original intent of the constitution holds that the Constitution means exactly what it says, and thus, is not open to interpretation or inference. This legal philosophy is sometimes called "judicial conservatism." In addition, strict constructionalism stemmed from Thomas Jefferson and other anti-federalists, who believed that since the United States government's powers are derived from the consent of the governed then the people or the States should restrict the Supreme Court's power. In other words, a judge should strictly look at the constitution and if it does not answer the problem at hand, then it should be up to the states to decide. Loose construction is based on the idea that the Founding Fathers could not have foreseen what the world would be like in the 21st Century, and that the Constitution must thus be interpreted in light of historic and societal change. Loose constructionism is sometimes called "judicial liberalism."
What does it mean to have a strict interpretation of the the constitution?
Well, it's kind of self-explanitory. It's the opposite of loose interpretration.. Strict interpretation of the Constitution is when you do only as much as the Constition allows you to do. Anything that is not mentioned in the Constitution is thought to be Unconstitutional.. For example, When Jefferson ran for president against Adams, he was an advocat of strict interpretation of the constituion. He didn't like the idea of a national bank because it wasn't mentioned in the constitution.
How did Hamilton and Jefferson differ in their interpretation of the Constitution?
Hamilton thought that iy was good but had some flaws and jefferson thought it wasnt a good idea at first
Strict interpretation of the constitution would have prevented Jefferson from?
nothing. he was a hypocrite. he went against what he believed. he believed that if it is not directly said in the constitution,, then it cant be done. yet he bought the Louisiana purchase.
What is the Between Loose Interpretation of the constitution and Strict Interpretation of the Constitution?
It perhaps has been said that between loose interpretation and strict interpretation of the Constitution there is the practical matter of applying the Constitution to the business of government. The Constitution of the United States of America is the Supreme Law of that land and guides that nation in their pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. In order to form a more perfect union the people, through the Constitution, granted limited and temporary power to certain government officials so that they might establish justice, provide for the common defense, ensure domestic tranquility and promote the general welfare. But what does it mean to promote the general welfare? How should our elected officials ensure domestic tranquility? How much power should the people grant military leaders in order to provide for a common defense? Exactly how does a government establish justice? These are the goals the people, through constitutional mandate have given their elected officials. How those government officials accomplish or attempt to accomplish those goals depends largely on how they interpret the Constitution. There are those who take a liberal view of the Constitution and others who take a conservative view of the same document and then there is everybody in between. A Liberal will take a loose interpretation of the Constitution as his strategy for accomplishing the necessary goals while a Conservative will adhere strictly to the text to guide them in what must be done. Those in between are not really using the Constitution as their guide. One can not be conservative on some issues and liberal on others without running into logical fallacies. This sort of political declaration only confuses the meaning of liberal and conservative. In the American political landscape if it is not the Constitution that is being conserved then exactly what is being conserved? It is not necessary for a liberal to know they are taking a liberal view of the Constitution in order to be a Liberal, but a Conservative must know that it is the original intent of the Constitution that they are conserving or they become nothing more than just another progressive movement and before you know it the main stream media starts inventing terms like "neo-conservative" and "moderate conservative" or "far right conservative" or even more confusing "left leaning conservative." They all just seem to be descriptions of people in between. There is no better way to illustrate the difference between a liberal and conservative view of the Constitution than by using the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights as an example. The Second Amendment states: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A liberal or loose interpretation will place its focus on what is meant by "well regulated militia" and a conservative or strict interpretation will place its focus on "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Of the many arguments made about the Second Amendment the serious ones come down to an interpretation that means that the people have a right to bear arms if they belong to a well regulated militia or an interpretation that means that in order for the people to keep and maintain well regulated militias the people must have the right to keep and bear their own arms. The difference between these two interpretations are radical and extreme. The Conservative, being fundamentally bound by the text which they hope to conserve must concede that "a well regulated militia" certainly can imply some sort of government regulation and such an interpretation should not be construed as a loose interpretation of the text. The conservative will also point out that the text does not imply that the people have a right to keep and bear arms but unequivocally states it and expressly forbids the government from infringing that right. A Liberal will counter that in order for a government to effectively regulate militias they must be able to regulate the right of the people to keep and bear arms. The conservative will claim that this is an infringement upon that right. The Liberal will counter that it is not the right itself that is being regulated but the exercise of that right that is being regulated and then the Conservative will challenge the Liberal to show where in the Constitution that the power to regulate the exercise of freedom was granted to government officials and the debate will continue going back and forth, round and round leaving everyone in between bored and agitated while gradual apathy creeps into their politics and so it remains that it is Liberals and Conservatives who stay the course while everyone in between follows.
What is the difference between Alexander Hamilton's liberal and Thomas Jefferson's conservative interpretation of the Constitution?
Alexander Hamiltion was a firm believer in the "elastic clause" and thought that the Constitution could be bent to the federal government's will, to insure its supremacy. Jefferson wanted to limit the federal government's power and thought that the Constitution was to insure the liberties of the people and not the power of the government, so his interpretation was very scrict.
What is loose interpretation of the constitution mean?
It basically means that the government doesn't revolve around theConstitution. We still have goals for the Country that theConstitution doesn't cover.
How did the Federalists and Republicans interpret the Constitution differently?
Republicans wanted to keep most power at the state or local level. They feared that a strong government would act like a monarchy. Federalists said the United States needed a strong federal government to hold the country together and deal with its problems.
Was jeffersons purchase of Louisiana based on a strict or loose interpretation of the constitution?
It was based on a loose interpretation of the Constitution because he wasn't really allowed to by the land, and he had to justify his actions by his hopes for the nation
What is the difference between a representation and an interpretation?
A representation in science is when you're supporting something and an interpretation is when you're telling somebody about results from something.
On what issue did Jefferson reverse his opinion on the strict interpretation of the constitution?
Jefferson reversed his opinion on the stric interpretation of the constitution by the purcahse of the Louisiana Territory.By completing the purchase, Jefferson had to put aside his principles because the allowance for this type of transaction was not expressly listed in the Constitution. Waiting for a Constitutional amendment might cause the deal to fall through. Therefore, Jefferson decided to go through with the purchase. Luckily, the people of the United States basically agreed that this was an excellent move.
What is The difference between the implied powers view of the constitution as to compared to loose construction view?
Implied powers are powers not specifically listed in the Constitution of the United States, but which the national government needs in order to carry out the expressed (strict) powers listed in the Constitution. Loose Construction is basically the same thing. A loose or liberal interpretation of the Constitution allows for the expansion of federal powers beyond those specifically listed in the Constitution.
What is the difference between interpretation and translation?
An interpretation, is someones opinion on what something could mean, or the way they take something. For example, a Christian's interpretation of how the world began would differ from a scientist's. A translation, is something that could also be taken different ways, but more often than not, there is only one correct way to take it. For example, if you were translating something from English, into a foreign language and you were just purely counting on a dictionary to tell you what you need to know, without putting into place any grammar rules that you know, or can research to find out about, your translation would undoubtedly be a little off the mark, because your word order, may be a little mixed up, or you may make some other error. You may use a word which is a translation of the word itself, but does not fit into the context of what you are supposed to be writing.
What was the debate between the Loose Vs Strict Constructionist?
The strict constructionists wants to follow the Constitution downto the letter, in accordance with what the founding meant the termsto mean. The loose constructionists want to incorporate changes tosociety into the interpretation of the Constitution.
What is the difference between compilar and interpreter?
compiler is a software translator used in ProgrammingLanguage: C,C++, Java etc ). This used for to translate High level language to Machine independent language. . Interpreter is used to translate source code to machine code by line by line.
What party believed in a strict interpretation of the constitution?
Members of the Democratic-Republican Party believed in a strictinterpretation of the Constitution. They were opposed to theFederalists, who generally believed in a stronger nationalgovernment.
Did Jefferson and Madison believe in a loose interpretation of the Constitution?
No. They were both strict constructionists. In fact, when Napoleon offered the Louisiana Purchase to the United States in 1803, Jefferson nearly said no because the Constitution says nothing about allowing the president to accept land from other countries. Alexander Hamilton - a loose constructionist - encouraged him to accept it.
What are the differences between a compiler and an interpreter?
What is the difference between strict and transitional markup?
A script markup has much, much more rules and the code must beperfect down to the smallest detail or the webpage will reject it.When using transitional, many more tags and attributes can be used,and if there is an error it will simply output it to the errorconsole.
What is the difference between interpretation and observation?
An interpretation is a view or opinion on something. An observation is a fact, for example "The kingfisher holds the fish away from himself." Whereas an interpretation would be "The kingfisher holds the fish away from himself because it's for a mate."
What is the difference between an evaluation and an interpretation?
evaluation is the assessment of something or a perceived value or data figure interpretation is ones opinon on what is means
What is the difference between compiling and interpreting?
Compiling is a form of 'gathering' information to come to a solution. Interpreting is seeing the information already presented, and then making a decision or judgment based on that. (:
What is the difference between strict constructionists and loose constructionists?
Strict Constructionists believe a narrow, strict and literalinterpretation of the express language of the Constitution isproper. This judicial philosophy requires a court to apply theexact written text of the law or regulation to the issue before thecourt. Otherwise known as "plain meaning," the court must apply thestatute as written; there must be no interpretation or drawinginferences. The problem with the Strict Construction philosophy is that itsadherents refuse to address ambiguity in language, or that themeaning of words can change over the years. And, if the traditionalmeaning was applied by a court, would current citizens understandthe court's decision. Example: Take the word "appeasement." Priorto WWII, appeasement was another word for "negotiation." Today, itmeans cowardly yielding to a bulling opponent. If "appeasement" waswritten into the Constitution or statute, if a StrictConstructionist used the pre-WWII interpretation of the word, wouldcontemporary readers understand the court's intent? Loose Constructionists believe the opposite; the literal languageof the Constitution or statutes must be interpreted in light ofcontemporary society, social conduct and common understanding oflanguage. As Justice Marshall wrote in M cCulloch , "Soundconstruction of the Constitution must allow to the nationallegislature that discretion with respect to the means by which thepowers it confers are to be carried into execution which willenable that body to perform the high duties assigned to it in themanner most beneficial to the people. Let the end be legitimate,let it be within the scope of the Constitution, and all means whichare appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which arenot prohibited, but consistent with the letter and spirit of theConstitution, are constitutional." McCulloch v. Maryland , 17 US 316 (S.Ct. 1819-03-06) Complicating this philosophical debate is that each side has neveradhered strictly to their own principles. Jefferson, the hero ofStrict Constructionists, often took a Loose Constructionistapproach while President. Hamilton, hero to the LooseConstructionists, often argued for strict application of theConstitution in certain situations. Last, do not confuse Strict Construction with Originalism.Originalism (the term came into usage in the 1980's) is aphilosophy based on the principle that courts are merely to upholdthe law, not interpret, "create" or amend laws. The latter powersare, under Originalism, reserved strictly for the legislativebranch.
What was Andrew Jackson's views on strict vs loose construction of the constitution?
As with Jefferson and Madison, Jackson had a mixed record on strict construction. On matters such spending federal funds on intrastate roads, he vetoed such legislation on the basis of it exceeding the enumerated power of congress to raise and distribute those funds so, stating: "it is true that many of the taxes collected from our citizens through the medium of imposts have for a considerable period been onerous. In many particulars these taxes have borne severely upon the laboring and less prosperous classes of the community, being imposed on the necessaries of life" As for the removal of indigenous populations from the state of Georgia, it would seem that this was beyond the enumerated powers of congress however, as was his use of federal troops to put down labor unrest
What is difference between interpreters and compiler?
Interpreter An interpreter is given a computer program to run and it is executed (or performed) line by line. It simply reads a line of code (in the programs native language (ie English Basic) and performs the instructions one by one. After each line has been completed, the next on is accessed and duly performed until the program is finished. The syntax of the program may have errors in it and these are not found out until the program is run. The user must have the source code to be able to run the program (some interpreters produces a tokenised version of the source code to speed up execution of the program and reduce disk storage.) Compiler. With a compiler, the entire code is translated into machine code before it is run and then saved to disk for future use. The entire program must be 100% syntax correct before the program is translated and saved to disk. Several other parts of the program (called libraries) can be linked with the program to produce the final product. Test compilations usually are performed to avoid a large number of compile errors at once. The compiled program is accessed by the user but they do not need the source code to use the program. The same program run as a compiled program will usually outperform an interpreted on.
What event challenged Thomas Jefferson's strict interpretation of the constitution?
The Louisiana Purchase. Jefferson (and many others) believed he, as president, lacked authority to make such a deal. The deal was made, through representatives, between Jefferson and Napoleon Bonaparte, who was, at the time, effectively the ruler of France. However, Jefferson's and others' belief that the Purchase was unconstitutional took a back seat to fears of European powers' (at the time, primarily France's) establishing colonies in North America.
What is the difference between interpreters and translators?
Interpretors and translators are pretty much one and the same however interpreters tend to know the culture of the language as well as just the words. Translators can be electronic devices or people.
What is the difference between loose construction and strict construction of the constitution?
Strict construction meant that those interpreting it thought thatthat the government should only have powers that were expresslystated in the constitution. Like, it shouldn't stretch the limitsor try to do things that the constitution didn't say specificallywere ok to do.