He meant it wasn't to be taken completely literal. For example, the Louisiana Purchase. Since there was nothing in the Constitution on buying land some people wondered whether we were "allowed" to.
Results 1 to 13 of 13
Thread: U.S. History
Hybrid View
- 08 Dec. 2009 09:07pm #1
- 08 Dec. 2009 09:22pm #2
- 08 Dec. 2009 11:00pm #3
Global Moderator Literally Hitler
Morbidly Obese
Bird Jesus
- Age
- 35
- Join Date
- Nov. 2009
- Location
- The Land Of Ooo
- Posts
- 8,569
- Reputation
- 711
- LCash
- -4.31
The fact is Jackson hated the constitution. He felt constrained by it. He wanted it to be loosely interpreted rather than strictly word for word. I.E. "We don't have power to make National Bank" He was just kind of the first President to really argue with anyone about it. His sort of interpretation of the constitution has allowed since then for all kind of things.
Jackson interpreted the power of congress narrowly and vetoed more bills than all previous 6 presidents.
Launched the Indian Removal act. Which basically nullified all contracts we made with them and was a violent campaign against them. Set tone for dealing with them from then after.
Jackson shut down the nullification crisis where S. Carolina tried to say tariff levyed by Jackson was unconstitutional and that the states could decide it was and not levy the tariff. Jackson responded with force.
Two party system started under Jackson.
Jackson issued Specie Circular which combated inflation after the US purchased land. This lead to crisis later; the Panic of 1837.