Main content
More than 200 years ago, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay published a series of essays promoting the ratification of the United States Constitution now known as Federalist Papers. In explaining the need for an independent judiciary, Alexander Hamilton noted in The Federalist # 78 that the federal courts "were designed to be an intermediate body between the people and their legislature" in order to ensure that the people's representatives acted only within the authority given to Congress under the Constitution.
The U.S. Constitution is the nation's fundamental law. It codifies the core values of the people. Courts have the responsibility to interpret the Constitution's meaning, as well as the meaning of any laws passed by Congress. The Federalist # 78 states further that, if any law passed by Congress conflicts with the Constitution, "the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents."
"Nor does this conclusion by any means suppose a superiority of the judicial to the legislative power. It only supposed that the power of the people is superior to both; and that where the will of the legislature, declared in its statutes, stands in opposition to that of the people, declared in the Constitution, the judges ought to be governed by the latter rather than the former. They ought to regulate their decisions by the fundamental laws, rather than by those which are not fundamental."
The American democratic system is not always based upon simple majority rule. There are certain principles that are so important to the nation that the majority has agreed not to interfere in these areas. For instance, the Bill of Rights was passed because concepts such as freedom of religion, speech, equal treatment, and due process of law were deemed so important that, barring a Constitutional Amendment, not even a majority should be allowed to change them.
Rule of law is a principle under which all persons, institutions, and entities are accountable to laws that are:
- Publicly promulgated
- Equally enforced
- Independently adjudicated
- And consistent with international human rights principles.
The courts play an integral role in maintaining the rule of law, particularly when they hear the grievances voiced by minority groups or by those who may hold minority opinions. Equality before the law is such an essential part of the American system of government that, when a majority, whether acting intentionally or unintentionally, infringes upon the rights of a minority, the Court may see fit to hear both sides of the controversy in court.
DISCLAIMER: These resources are created by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts for educational purposes only. They may not reflect the current state of the law, and are not intended to provide legal advice, guidance on litigation, or commentary on any pending case or legislation.
Explain how the Declaration of Independence reflected the political principles of popular sovereignty, social contract, natural rights, and individual rights.
General Information
Subject Area: Social Studies
Grade: 912
Strand: Civics and Government
Date Adopted or Revised: 02/14
Status: State Board Approved
Related Access Points
Alternate version of this benchmark for students with significant cognitive disabilities.
SS.912.C.1.In.b: Identify principles of natural rights, individual rights, and government of the people (popular sovereignty) reflected in the Declaration of Independence.
SS.912.C.1.Su.b: Recognize principles of natural rights and government of the people reflected in the Declaration of Independence.
SS.912.C.1.Pa.b: Recognize government of the people as a principle of the Declaration of Independence.
Related Resources
Vetted resources educators can use to teach the concepts and skills in this benchmark.
Student Resources
Vetted resources students can use to learn the concepts and skills in this benchmark.
Parent Resources
Vetted resources caregivers can use to help students learn the concepts and skills in this benchmark.
14a. State Constitutions
James Wilson signed the Declaration of Independence and was the Advocate General for France in America from 1779 to 1783.
The states now faced serious and complicated questions about how to make their rules. What did it mean to replace royal authority with institutions based on popular rule? How was "popular sovereignty" (the idea that the people were the highest authority) to be institutionalized in the new state governments? For that matter, who were "the people"?
Every state chose to answer these questions in different ways based on distinctive local experiences, but in most cases colonial traditions were continued, but modified, so that the governor (the executive) lost significant power, while the assemblies (the legislative branch, which represented the people most directly) became much more important. We'll focus on the new rules created in three states to suggest the range of answers to the question about how to organize republican governments based upon popular rule.
John Adams remarked that the Pennsylvania constitution of 1776 was "so democratical that it must produce confusion and every evil work." He would be elected to the Presidency in 1796.
Pennsylvania created the most radical state constitution of the period. Following the idea of popular rule to its logical conclusion, Pennsylvania created a state government with several distinctive features. First, the Pennsylvania constitution of 1776 abolished property requirements for voting as well as for holding office. If you were an adult man who paid taxes, then you were allowed to vote or even to run for office. This was a dramatic expansion of who was considered a political person, but other aspects of the new state government were even more radical. Pennsylvania also became a "unicameral" government where the legislature only had one body. Furthermore, the office of the governor was entirely eliminated. Radicals in Pennsylvania observed that the governor was really just like a small-scale king and that an upper legislative body (like the House of Lords in Parliament) was supposed to represent wealthy men and aristocrats. Rather than continue those forms of government, the Pennsylvania constitution decided that "the people" could rule most effectively through a single body with complete legislative power.
Many conservative Patriots met Pennsylvania's new design with horror. When John Adams described the Pennsylvania constitution, he only had bad things to say. To him it was "so democratical that it must produce confusion and every evil work." Clearly, popular rule did not mean sweeping democratic changes to all Patriots.
South Carolina's state constitution of 1778 created new rules at the opposite end of the political spectrum from Pennsylvania. In South Carolina, white men had to possess a significant amount of property to vote, and they had to own even more property to be allowed to run for political office. In fact, these property requirements were so high that 90 percent of all white adults were prevented from running for political office!
John Rutledge served as both South Carolina's president and governor. The state's original constitution, drafted in 1776, called for the election of a state president. But changes made to the document in 1778 saw the state's chief executive become known as "governor."
This dramatic limitation of who could be an elected political leader reflected a central tradition of 18th-century Anglo-American political thought. Only individuals who were financially independent were believed to have the self-control to make responsible and reasonable judgments about public matters. As a result poor white men, all women, children, and African Americans (whether free or slave) were considered too dependent on others to exercise reliable political judgment. While most of these traditional exclusions from political participation have been ended in America today, age limitations remain, largely unchallenged.
The creation of the Massachusetts state constitution of 1780 offered yet another way to answer some of the questions about the role of "the people" in creating a republican government. When the state legislature presented the voters with a proposed constitution in 1778, it was rejected because the people thought that this was too important an issue for the government to present to the people. If the government could make its own rules, then it could change them whenever it wanted and easily take away peoples' liberties. Following through on this logic, Massachusetts held a special convention in 1780 where specially elected representatives met to decide on the best framework for the new state government.
This idea of a special convention of the people to decide important constitutional issues was part of a new way of thinking about popular rule that would play a central role in the ratification of the national Constitution in 1787-1788.
Constitution of Massachusetts (1780)
The Massachusetts constitution marked a new level of citizen participation in government. The idea of a convention greatly altered constitutional decision making.
Click on the link to read the full text of the 1780 constitution.
Report broken link
Religion and the State Governments
What role should the state play in the religious lives of its people? Should the government lend support to the churches?
These questions have often been asked by fledgling governments, and the early American states were no different. Visit this Library of Congress site for an overview of the question, with sections on the Massachusetts constitution of 1780 and the debate in Virginia. Includes several pictures of the original documents.
Report broken link
The Pennsylvania General Assembly
Produced by the state of Pennsylvania, this site offers access to info on the current session of the general assembly as well as an excellent history of Pennsylvania that spans from colonization to modern times. Visit the welcome center for the historical angle and pictures of one of the most lavish capitol buildings in the country.
Creating a Commonwealth
The Pennsylvania Department of State is one of the oldest government agencies in the nation, with roots that date back to the 1680s, nearly a century before the Revolutionary War.
Report broken link
State Constitutions
The U.S. Constitution was actually the 14th such document of the new republic. Each state had been operating under its own constitution since the Revolution, although some were pretty much just the colonial charters without the word "king." Many even had bills of rights. Learn about James Madison and the state
constitutions from PBS's extensive "Liberty! Chronicles of the Revolution". Play the Road to Revolution game while you are here.
Report broken link
Over 200 years since that first constitution in 1776, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania continues to thrive. Click below to visit their official website and learn more about Pennsylvania's history, culture, people, and
more.
Learn More...
Report broken link