Advantages And Disadvantages Of A Codified Constitution

The United States Constitution was signed in 1787, in hopes of creating a new legal system that would ensure basic human rights for all citizens. Often, the constitution evokes political discussion on whether or not there should be a constitutional convention. The article named “Re – examining the Constitution by Kenneth Jost (2012), provides the reader with an interesting analysis of the pros and cons of a constitutional convention (“Con – Con”). Citizens who oppose the Con – Con argue that changing the Constitution wouldn’t transition well because of the current political climate, and explain that it has worked fine over the years. On the other hand, citizens who are in favor of the Con – Con, state that the constitution is outdated, and suggest that reviewing it may be beneficial to better suit the citizen’s needs. A close comparison of both arguments reveals that people who support the constitutional convention have stronger reasons regarding the document and are more rational about the issues associated with it.

There is much debate in political theory about the definition of a constitution. Generally, it is considered as a

In codified constitutions, laws are entrenched which makes it harder for them to evolve and adapt to modern requirements because it takes a long time for a response due to the required procedures, which might involve gaining two-thirds majority in the legislature or approval by referendum. As a result, one can argue that countries with codified constitutions struggle to find a resolution to their dogmatic laws. For example, the USA are still unable to introduce stricter gun laws because it opposes the constitutional right for citizens to bear arms, even though

The Advantages and Disadvantages of an Unwritten Constitution in the UK The UK has an unwritten constitution unlike the U.S.A. Instead Britain's laws, policies and codes are developed through statutes, common law, convention and more recently E.U law. It is misleading to call the British constitution unwritten; a more precise form of classification would be un-codified. This means that the British constitution has no single document, which states principles and rules of a state. However, The British constitution clearly sets out how political power is allocated and where it is legally located. The British constitution is still visible and it defines composition and powers of the main offices and

The Articles of Confederation and the U.S. Constitution are very different government documents. The Articles establishing a confederacy, which is where the states have all the and the federal government is more of a suggestion. Whereas the Constitution established a federalist government, which is where the federal government has most of the power and the states have a limited amount. Overall, there are more advantages to the federalist government. Almost every decision the government makes is by a trusted group of elected congressmen. With a confederacy you have all the states that have a chance to put the other states in danger. Like if Texas declared war on Canada that would put all the states above them

Throughout more than two centuries of the grand experiment in democracy known as the American union, a time marked by the rise and fall of empires, the technological transition from plough horse to combustion engine, and even mankind's first steps into the frontier of outer space, a single document has stood as the defining feature of our nation's ideals and purpose. The Constitution of the United States, including the Bill of Rights which grants every citizen certain unassailable liberties, and the subsequent amendments made to reflect society's slow progression, is undoubtedly one of history's most significant and substantive texts. Just as it did during the uncertain years following our forefather's successful revolution, today the Constitution establishes societal boundaries and provides structure to the uniquely uninhibited way that American lives are led. Epitomizing the values of a true charter of supreme law, the U.S. Constitution has since become the model for other emerging democracies, as countries such as Mexico and the Philippines have adopted similar measures within their own national charters. Indeed, during the 1987 bicentennial celebration of the Constitution's first signing, TIME Magazine reported that "of the 170 countries that exist today, more than 160 have written charters modeled directly or indirectly on the U.S. version" (Liptak, 2012), illustrating the extensive influence this essential document has exerted on global affairs.

Upon considering whether the Constitution in its current form should be ratified, four main points of consideration come into focus: the four main arguments determining the future for the United States and its people. Under the current form of government, the Articles of Confederation, a question of whether a stronger central government is needed is asked. This question is followed by if the United States would be more prosperous under a confederation of loosely governed states, and if a powerful national government consolidates the states. Next, the question of whether the Constitution provides a fair, honest system of representation for all classes of people, and finally, whether the document supports natural and

A Constitution, to contain an accurate detail of all the subdivisions of which its great powers will admit, and of all the means by which they may be carried into execution, would partake of the prolixity of a legal code, and could scarcely be embraced by the human mind. It would probably never be understood by the public. Its nature, therefore, requires that only its great outlines should be marked, its important objects designated, and the minor ingredients which compose those objects be deduced from the nature of the objects themselves. (McCulloch V. Maryland)

James Madison stated, “In framing a system which we wish to last for ages, we should not lose sight of the changes which ages will produce.” In my conclusion the Constitution used the Articles of Confederation to establish a stronger central government where each state had individual views and maintained various lifestyles of citizens which continuously delayed ratification. However, the flexibility of the constitution led to many debates which in the end resulted in the establishment of an acceptable

The UK’s unwritten constitution, formed of Acts of Parliament [AoP], Royal Prerogative [RP], Constitutional Convention [CC] and Case Law [CL], prompts much debate about the ease of which constitutional change can be introduced. A written constitution is, by definition and practice, hard to alter however it remains to be seen whether it is any easier to change an unwritten

Certain interests do not change over time in our society. Over 200 years ago, the prominent concern that led to the framing of the Constitution regarded the establishment of a government that was “for the people and by the people.” The framers of the Constitution, with concern of an over powering central government in mind, provided a basis for the structure of the federal government of the United States. The powers of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government are laid out strategically in a way that no one branch can have more power than the other. The national concern of maintaining a legitimate government has not shifted since the initial days of the framers. Although the capacity of the government has grown over time, the system of checks and balances that was adapted in the framing of the Constitution allows for the structure and powers of the federal government to remain in order today. Other than providing a structural map for how the government will operate, however, the additional aspects of the Constitution fail to administer practical framework for addressing 21st century interests. This document was written over 200 years ago and it has not been altered substantially since then (Lazare). While certain Amendments have been added to assist the Constitution in staying relevant, such as the abolishment of slavery and the addition of women’s right to vote, there has been practically nothing added to help in applying the framers’ intentions

Is the United States Constitution a sacred and absolute document? Dahl (2001) argued that the Constitution is not perfect or permanent in his book, How Democratic is the American Constitution. He stresses that his main aim is not to propose that the Constitution must be amended, but to facilitate readers in changing how they think about the Constitution. In order to help people rethink the Constitution, Dahl (2001) explained the limitations of its Framers and the Constitution’s not widely known undemocratic aspects. The strengths of the book are its ethos or reputation of the author that establishes his credibility, informal writing style that can appeal to more people, its consideration of a number of undemocratic aspects of the

On the other hand a codified constitution would clarify the nature of the political system to its citizens. Currently in the UK the constitution is not easy to find which makes it difficult for the UKs citizens to learn the nature of the political system but also all the rights that as a citizen of the UK you should enjoy. For example in the USA the bill of rights is a part of their constitution and every citizen can gain access to these rights. In the USA the whole constitution is on one document and all citizens have access to it. This may make it easier for the UK as a whole to understand the British

The British constitution is flexible in nature, which has allowed for the development of this country over centuries without the need for a fully codified constitution. I

A codified constitution would describe and entrench the structure of government, the relationship between different parts of government and the relationship between government and citizens. So it would therefore prevent arbitrary government. An introduction of a codified constitution would protect the rights of the citizens. It is argued that citizen’s rights can only be protected if they are entrenched in a codified constitution.