What is the intent of the U.S. Constitution?

Do the Federalist Papers show the intent of the U.S. Constitution?

The Federalist Papers are not just some antiquated editorial opinion, they are, according to the Supreme Court in Cohens v. Virginia, the exact record of the intent of the Constitution. Cohens v. Virginia 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 264 at 418:

“The opinion of the Federalist has always been considered as of great authority.
It is a complete commentary on our constitution; and is appealed to by all parties in the questions to which that instrument has given birth. Its intrinsic merit entitles it to this high rank; and the part two of its authors performed in framing the constitution, put it very much in their power to explain the views with which it was framed. These essays having been published while the constitution was before the nation for adoption or rejection, and having been written in answer to objections founded entirely on the extent of its powers, and on its diminution of State sovereignty, are entitled to the more consideration where they frankly avow that the power objected to is given, and defend it.”

Just in case you think a law or an amendment changed the intent of your Constitution, Think again. A congressman cannot swear an oath to support and defend your constitution and then mutiny by suggesting an amendment to change something that he is sworn to perpetuate. Article V allows amendments TO the constitution, there can never be an amendment OF the constitution. It’s meaning does not change. Here is the proof:

The 1905 U.S. Supreme Court, South Carolina v. U.S., 199 US 437:
“The Constitution is a written instrument. As such, its meaning does not alter. That which it meant when it was adopted, it means now…”

The 1901 Supreme Court in Downes v. Bidwill, 182 U.S. 244, ruled:
“It will be an evil day for American liberty if the theory of a government outside of the supreme law of the land finds lodgment in our constitutional jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this court than to exert its full authority to prevent all violation of the principles of the Constitution.”

The U.S. Supreme Court, Byars v. U.S., 273 US 28 (1927) repeating their earlier decision in Boyd:
“…and it is the duty of the courts to be watchful for the constitutional rights of the citizen, and against any stealthy encroachments thereon.”

The U.S. Supreme Court, Headliner note to Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. 264:
“The Supreme Court will construe provisions of Constitution which appear to be repugnant, so as to preserve the true intent and meaning of the Constitution… ”

The U.S. Supreme Court, Boyd v. United States, 116 US 616, Page 635:
“illegitimate and unconstitutional practices get their first footing in that way, namely, by silent approaches and slight deviations from legal modes of procedure. It is the duty of courts to be watchful for the constitutional rights of the citizen, and against any stealthy encroachment thereon. ”

The U.S. Supreme Court, Norton vs. Shelby County 118 US 425 page 442:
“An Unconstitutional Act is not law; it confers no rights: it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”

The U.S. Supreme Court, Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436 page 491:
“Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.”

The U.S. Supreme Court, Marbury vs. Madison. 5 US 137: All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void

President John Adams: “Our Constitution was made only for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.”

Daniel Webster:
“I shall exert every faculty I possess in aiding to prevent the Constitution form being nullified, destroyed, or impaired; and, even thought I should see it fall, I will still, with a voice feeble, perhaps, but earnest as ever issued from human lips, and with fidelity and zeal which nothing shall extinguish, call on the people to come to its rescue.”

John Quincy Adams:
“Posterity – you will never know how much it has cost my generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it.”


Originally Answered Jun 23, 2018, by Steven Miller

For more information read my essay The Constitution Does Not Change at https://wp.me/P7yY3A-3q

Leave a Reply