answersLogoWhite

0

Jefferson wanted a strict interpretation to give more power to the states, while hamilton favored a broad interpretation to streengthen the central government. Also, Jefferson wanted to give the common people more opportunities to participate in government while hamilton believed commoners were ignorant and not capable of self-government

User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago

What else can I help you with?

Related Questions

What was alexanders views on how the constitution should be interpreted?

Hamilton believed that the federal government could do as they needed to govern the country. He believed in a loose interpretation of the Constitution.


What was Alexander Hamilton's views on how the Constitution should be interpreted?

Hamilton believed that the federal government could do as they needed to govern the country. He believed in a loose interpretation of the Constitution.


How did hamiltons and jeffersons views toward the interpretation of the constitution different?

Alexander Hamilton believed in a loose interpretation, while Thomas Jefferson believed in a strict interpretation.


Alexander Hamiltons views were most closely aligned with the?

british


Compare the views of a strict constructionist and a liberal constructionist?

A strict constructionist believes the Constitution should be interpreted narrowly, sticking to the original intent of the framers. In contrast, a liberal constructionist believes the Constitution should be interpreted broadly to adapt to changing times and new circumstances. Strict constructionists tend to emphasize literal readings of the Constitution, while liberal constructionists focus on the broader principles and values underlying it.


What statement best describes Hamilton's views on how the Constitution should be interpreted?

Alexander Hamilton advocated for a broad interpretation of the Constitution, emphasizing that its provisions should be understood in light of their underlying principles and the needs of a dynamic society. He believed in the "living Constitution" approach, which allows for flexibility and adaptability over time. This perspective is particularly evident in his support for implied powers, as articulated in Federalist No. 78, where he argued that the government should have the authority to act in ways not explicitly outlined in the text, as long as such actions are consistent with its intended purpose.


What were Benjamin franklins views on the constitution?

He believed in the constitution, fought for it, lived it.


What are the Republican views on the constitution?

I know some views that the Republicans have on the United States Constitution. I also know twelve ways that the Republicans want to change the U.S. Constitution. There is no straight-on election of senators


How did Jefferson's views about the constitution's implied powers differ from the views of Alexander Hamilton's?

Jefferson's views differed from Hamilton's because Jefferson believed that implied powers are the powers that are "absolutely necessary" to carry out expressed powers, but Hamilton thought it meant that they were not expressly forbidden in the Constitution.


What were the federalist political views in regards of writing the constitution?

The federalists wanted a constitution to gain more national government power.


What is a constitutional provision the supports that the Constitution should be flexible?

There isn't one. Article 3 of the US Constitution enables the judiciary to interpret laws. That's why you have so many Justices in the Supreme Court who have varying views on how to interpret the Constitution. For example, Justice Scalia is known to be one who thinks the Constitution isn't flexible, while Ginsberg is generally for flexibility.


What was Justice Rehnquist political philosophy?

Justice William Rehnquist's political philosophy was characterized by a commitment to judicial restraint, federalism, and an originalist interpretation of the Constitution. He believed in limiting the power of the federal government and emphasized states' rights, often opposing expansive interpretations of federal authority. Rehnquist also advocated for a strict constructionist approach, arguing that the Constitution should be interpreted based on its original meaning at the time of its drafting. His views often aligned with conservative legal principles, reflecting a preference for traditional values and limited government intervention.