237 years ago our Constitution was ratified and our Nation is still guided by this amazing document U.S. Constitution ratified Getty Images Published: November 24, 2009 Last Updated: May 28, 2025 June 21, 1788: New Hampshire becomes the ninth and last necessary state to ratify the Constitution of the United States, thereby making the document the law of the land. By 1786, defects in the post-Revolutionary War Articles of Confederation were apparent, such as the lack of central authority over foreign and domestic commerce. Congress endorsed a plan to draft a new constitution, and on May 25, 1787, the Constitutional Convention convened at Independence Hall in Philadelphia. On September 17, 1787, after three months of debate moderated by convention president George Washington, the new U.S. constitution, which created a strong federal government with an intricate system of checks and balances, was signed by 38 of the 41 delegates present at the conclusion of the convention. As dictated by Article VII, the document would not become binding until it was ratified by nine of the 13 states. History Shorts: Who Wrote the U.S. Constitution? The U.S. Constitution was a group effort of some of the country's greatest minds, but the bulk of the document can actually be credited to one Founding Father. 00:29 Beginning on December 7, five states—Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Georgia, and Connecticut—ratified it in quick succession. However, other states, especially Massachusetts, opposed the document, as it failed to reserve undelegated powers to the states and lacked constitutional protection of basic political rights, such as freedom of speech, religion, and the press. In February 1788, a compromise was reached under which Massachusetts and other states would agree to ratify the document with the assurance that amendments would be immediately proposed. The Constitution was thus narrowly ratified in Massachusetts, followed by Maryland and South Carolina. On June 21, 1788, New Hampshire became the ninth state to ratify the document, and it was subsequently agreed that government under the U.S. Constitution would begin on March 4, 1789. In June, Virginia ratified the Constitution, followed by New York in July. On September 25, 1789, the first Congress of the United States adopted 12 amendments to the U.S. Constitution—the Bill of Rights—and sent them to the states for ratification. Ten of these amendments were ratified in 1791. In November 1789, North Carolina became the 12th state to ratify the U.S. Constitution. Rhode Island, which opposed federal control of currency and was critical of compromise on the issue of slavery, resisted ratifying the Constitution until the U.S. government threatened to sever commercial relations with the state. On May 29, 1790, Rhode Island voted by two votes to ratify the document, and the last of the original 13 colonies joined the United States. Today the U.S. Constitution is the oldest written constitution in operation in the world.
Well...it had a good 200 year run until both sides just started co-opting and misrepresenting it to meet their agenda.
Like the Bible and Clausewitz, people loudly quote the passages that support their narratives and skip over the parts that are inconvenient.
It's never the wrong time for a preemptive "both sides"ing. But anyone who thinks that "both sides" have disrespected our laws, country and Constitution even remotely close to equally in the last decade or so (or more) either hasn't been paying attention, or is willfully blind to what's going on. After all, the political leaders of "both sides" have sent tourists and hostages to visit our Capitol Building (and pardoned them) in order to overturn an election, and have literally sent untried, uncharged individuals to prisons in a country they are not from, to uh ...... stay there for a while, I guess? Both sides did this, right? Yeah, it was both sides. (And obviously there are endlessly more examples)
I saw this posted in another thread. I thought it might be valuable to think about ....... for the people who claim to love the Constitution, but who support someone who shows it no respect whatsoever. The thing about due process is it only works if it is applied evenly. We can't just pick a group of people and decide they don't get due process. Then have them tried in the court of public opinion based on hyper partisan news reporting to form an opinion that breaks up a family and sends a person to a contracted [Salvadoran] prison. ( ^^ Not both sides.)
Taking livelihood from good people who didnt feel safe getting a shot...while forcing businesses to close (^^ also not both sides) We can find many things that BOTH SIDES find unconstitutional about the other. You just live with Democratic blinders on and cant see any wrongs on your own side. No honest person thinks that either side really cares about the constitution aside from personal gain.
What Constitutional provision does a vaccine mandate or a forced closure due to a pandemic violate specifically? Not liking something doesn't make it unconstitutional.
LOL. I wonder why all these people were all kookoo bird anti-vax, anti-science? Hmmmmmm ....... But yeah, one of dozens of mandatory vaccines is pretty much the same as a party-wide criminal conspiracy to try to overturn an election. Both sides. Public health advocates are watching in growing alarm as former President Trump increasingly embraces the anti-vaccine movement. “I will not give one penny to any school that has a vaccine mandate or a mask mandate,” Trump said in a recent campaign rally in Richmond, Va. Trump’s vaccine rhetoric sends chills through public health circles "....people are refusing to take the Vaccine because they don’t trust his Administration, they don’t trust the Election results, and they certainly don’t trust the Fake News, which is refusing to tell the Truth.” https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/19/politics/donald-trump-covid-19-vaccines
Trump's "Constitutional" America. Sad. Wonder what's next - Trump can deport people to between the front lines of the Russian and Ukrainian armies?
Our governor here got shot down trying to close bars while allowing restaurants to open. He also denied the right to assemble longer than many other states. Religious liberties were also infringed on. Every state was different, but to argue that constitutional rights werent infringed on isnt a realistic argument Fwiw. I was willing to honor the recommendations of health officials, but I can do that and still admit that rights were violated.
Ignoring your otherwise repetitive and tiresome “both sides” trope, I’m curious, do you think that the level of what you are describing started in 1976? There have been challenges to it and more expensive interpretations enacted pretty much since the beginning. To some extent the first 150 years you had actual amendments to address some of those issues, but eventually the two thirds threshold became too difficult to achieve in the senate and states for pretty much anything. From my perspective the only notable exception to this trend is Trump, who is pushing the limits more than any president in recent history and is the only president I know of who has said the constitution should be set aside to make him president after 2020.
Literally none of those words you just typed makes the point you think it does. I was pro mask. Pro quarantine when sick. I am vaccinated. I followed every recommendation almost to the letter. I enforced all local and state requirements for my business. Yet, I still understand it was not constitutional.
So the 18th Amendment? Literally none of that is a Constitutional issue. That is not liking a policy (while claiming that you did like the policy, confusingly). If states are okay to close for 3 months to stop the spread of a contagious disease, you would have a very difficult argument claiming that the Constitution expressly forbids 4 months without some pretty compelling evidence of bad faith.
I’m guessing the issue was the inconsistency Governments have the ability to impose curfews and similar restrictions during emergencies or similar situations Religious liberties are not absolute. Constitutional rights are absolute in 100% of circumstances Again rights can be temporarily restricted in certain circumstances
