Where Did the Constitution Come From

Competency 1
Historical problems were managed in the evolution of the U.S. Constitution through the working out of the system of rights that the states would have vs. the rights that would belong to the federal government. In the early days, it was very much a battle between those who wanted a strong central government (the Federalists) and those who wanted strong states (the Anti-Federalists). The Federalists were led by men like Alexander Hamilton, who wrote many of the Federalist Papers and warned Americans that if they did not adopt the Constitution, their nation would tear itself apart from the inside out; it would get involved in all kinds of foreign wars, and it would never be safe. The Anti-Federalists argued that a strong central government would quickly lead to a tyranny just like that which the Revolutionaries had opposed in the War for Independence. In the end the Federalists won out, the Bill of Rights was ratified and the Constitution was embraced.
The historical problems that were managed in the Constitution included who had the right to bear arms, the right of habeas corpus, the right of due process, the right to be protected against undue searches and seizures, the right to counsel, the right to assemble, and the right to free speech. In short the Constitution focused mainly on ensuring that the liberties so valued by the Americans were protected by law—though Hamilton certainly won a solid victory for the federal government when he got the majority of the new nation to accept the Constitution which subtly opened the door for exactly the type of power grab that the Anti-Federalists feared would come to pass.
The importance of this learning is that it helps to keep perspective on the nation’s history and where the rights and laws that are on the books come from. The culture and philosophy that gave birth to the present culture and laws of the nation need to be known so that they can be better understood. When people know where they came from, they can have a better idea of where they are going in the future.
The application of this learning in a career context is that in the case of criminal justice, it helps one to better be able to interpret the laws and the spirit of the law as they were intended by the Founding Fathers. Knowing how the Constitution addressed historical problems regarding rights, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, a person with a career in criminal justice has a better perspective on his field in general and will be better conditioned to make good choices when it comes to acting in his capacity in the law, whether it is as a prosecutor, a defender, a judge, a law enforcement officer, and so on.
Competency 2
There are three branches of government in the U.S.—the executive, the legislative, and the judicial. The executive branch is responsible for executing the law: it includes everyone from the President to the law enforcement agents that enforce the law. The legislative branch is responsible for writing the law: it includes the Congressmen who draft and vote on bills that will be codified into law. The judicial branch is responsible for judging cases according to the law. If a person is arrested, the judicial branch hears the case; or if a law is deemed unjust, this branch decides the matter: it includes judges, prosecutors, and defenders.
The Bill of Rights consists of the first 10 amendments to the Constitution and while the Bill of Rights does not explicitly separate the government into three separate branches, it is implied that the government should consist of these three separate parts which are to serve one another and the people through a system of checks and balances.
This system was more clearly explained in the Federalist Papers, which were written to help justify to the Americans why the Bill of Rights should be ratified in the Constitution. James Madison wrote in Federalist No. 51 that without a system of checks and balances by having three branches of government, the nation would inevitably drift into tyranny—thus three distinct branches were needed: “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive and judicial in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self–appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny” (Madison, Federalist No. 51, 1788). This argument was based on the ideas promulgated by John Locke and Montesquieu, both of whom argued for a separation of the powers in the 18th century (Separation of Powers with Checks and Balances, 2018). The Bill of Rights was written with this separation in mind, though it is not explicitly made in the document itself.
This learning is important because it explains why our government is set up the way it is. Without understanding how the different branches work to balance out the system, one may make the mistake of thinking any one branch is more powerful than the other. The division was created in order to ensure that each part was equal. This helps to guarantee that tyranny of government will never exist—at least in theory.
The application of this knowledge is important because in the criminal justice system, one has to guard against the assumption of too much power. Whether one is drafting the laws, judging or interpreting the laws, or enforcing the laws, one has to remember that one himself is not the law nor is he above the law. The separate branches help to keep members of the criminal justice system humble, which is a necessary quality in this field: without humility the system will not work (Bazelon, 1975; Randa, 1997).
Competency 3
The substantive and procedural interpretations of individual freedoms based on case analysis are routinely made in today’s criminal justice system. Substantive due process for instance helps to protect defendants from unjust or unreasonable government force, from tyranny, and from a violation of their unalienable rights, as defined by the Constitution. Procedural interpretation of individual freedoms are seen when defendants are actually given the opportunity to state their case and defend themselves in a court of law. Cases throughout American history have been heard to help define these substantive and procedural interpretations. They include cases like Blockburger v. United States, in which substantive and procedural interpretations were made regarding the issue of double jeopardy. Brewer v. Williams, Johnson v. Zerbst and Powell v. Alabama were cases in which substantive and procedural interpretations were made regarding the right to counsel. Taylor v. Louisiana tackled the issue of women on juries and provided substantive and procedural interpretations. In short, case law sets precedent and provides a lens by which the Constitution may be understood and enacted.
This learning is important because it helps one to understand how cases can be used to set precedent in the court, and how a defendant or prosecution may use previous cases and their rulings to help make their own case. The application of this knowledge to the criminal justice field is clear: understanding how to interpret case law in both a procedural and substantive way can help one make a case, whether one is defending an individual or prosecuting an individual.
Competency 4
Judicial activism has played a large part in American history and the philosophies of several Supreme Court decisions can be seen as significant in the outcome of various cases: for example, Brown v. Board of Education—the 1954 Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that segregation was a violation of the Constitution and thus public schools were desegregated; or Roe v. Wade: the 1973 Supreme Court case made abortion legal. In the former, the philosophy that guided the Court was one of social justice and equality. For the latter, the philosophy was rooted in the emerging philosophical doctrines of the Feminist Movement.
This lesson is important because of the philosophical underpinnings that are always running through society: knowing them can help one better predict and anticipate how certain Courts will rule on certain cases and how the Courts will help to guide how society should govern itself. As Weaver (1984) notes, ideas have consequences and the ideas that individuals carry with them will have an impact on how they view cases and how they decide them.
The application of this lesson within the field of criminal justice can be seen in the sense that whether one is executing the law, writing the law or interpreting the law, one is always going to be mindful of the philosophical basis that goes into doing this work. It is not just a matter of interpreting the Constitution but also of having a lens that is used, a framework, a philosophy that impacts that interpretation or that informs how one views it. By being mindful of the way that philosophy alters one’s perception, one can better have a more rigorous approach to criminal justice and not go into the field with blind spots to how one’s own philosophy is impactful or how the philosophies of others will make a difference in the field.
Competency 5
Communicating effectively in writing is critical to being successful in any field, especially in criminal justice as so much depends upon the written record. An individual in this field who does not possess a capacity for communication using the written word will fail miserably on the job. Law enforcement officers must be adept at writing down the details of their interactions with individuals over the course of their day as a big part of their job is simply spent filling out reports. If these reports are not filled out accurately or with good details they will not be relevant or helpful to the department.
Judges also must write a great deal when they are giving decisions and their communication must be effective, clear and meaningful. If a judge writes a decision that is incomprehensible, he does not do his duty by his office and the people who have a vested interest in the case will not receive the justice that is guaranteed them. Therefore, in order to be a good interpreter of the law, one must also be a good and effective communicator using the written word.
Those in the legislative branch must also know how to write effectively as they are the ones who will devise the law and write it. And those in the executive branch must be good communicators using the written word because their words help to enforce the law. Likewise, activists must be good communicators as they are stakeholders in how society views laws, how laws are shaped, and how the system of criminal justice is ultimately determined. As Davis (2012) shows, the way in which people communicate is the way in which they think—and the way in which they think has a big impact on the way in which they go about their lives and their professions.
Summary
In summation, the five competencies discussed in this paper were: 1) the historical problems that were addressed in the evolution of the Constitution, 2) the role of each branch of government in terms of the Bill of Rights, 3) the substantive and procedural interpretations of individual freedoms based on case analysis, 4) the philosophical underpinnings and public policy influences associated with U.S. Supreme Court decisions, and 5) the need to write effectively.
Each of these competencies is critical to having a good career in criminal justice. The first allows for one to have an effective framework for how to judge the historical character of the Constitution. By knowing the context out of which our current set of laws came into existence, one can be better prepared to exercise one’s duty in whatever branch of the government one is working. By understanding how the branches connect to the Bill of Rights, which is like the trunk, one has a sense of one’s duty to the whole and will refrain from thinking that his branch is the best or most powerful: in truth, they all rely upon one another and are there to ensure that no single branch becomes too big or too strong. By understanding the substantive and procedural interpretations of case law, one can adopt a more pragmatic stance within the criminal justice system, knowing how to implement case law and what to use when viewing a particular set of circumstances. By knowing the philosophical underpinnings and public policy influences that shaped Court decisions, one can better see how cultural and social ideas impact the way the law is shaped and interpreted and defined. By being able to write effectively, one can communicate one’s knowledge in a forceful and meaningful way that unites people and allows them to pursue a common aim.

References
Bazelon, D. L. (1975). The morality of the criminal law. Southern California Law
Review, 49, 385-405.
Davis, A. Y. (2012) The Meaning of Freedom. San Francisco, CA: City Light Books.
Madison, J. (1788). Federalist No. 51. Retrieved from
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed51.asp
Randa, L. (1997). Society’s final solution: A history and discussion of the death
penalty. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
Separation of Powers with Checks and Balances. (2018). Retrieved from
https://www.docsoffreedom.org/student/readings/separation-of-powers-with-checks-and-balances
Weaver, R. (1984). Ideas have consequences. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Press.