第十修正案

L. Ackerman
{"title":"第十修正案","authors":"L. Ackerman","doi":"10.24908/fede.v20i1.13178","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper argues that the Tenth Amendment was a beneficial compromise between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, and as a result the Amendment is not a truism, but instead integral to securing state sovereignty and protecting the integrity of federalism.  The paper begins by describing the historical context for the inclusion of the Amendment and the framers’ reasoning for its inclusion. The paper continues on to evaluate the Amendment from its conception until present day. The paper refutes the Amendment as a truism, displaying how the Supreme Court has significantly developed the relevance and use of the Amendment through two major time periods: the interwar period and the years following the Supreme Court case Schechter Corp. v. United States. A variety of Supreme Court cases, peer reviewed articles, and recently published news articles are employed to illustrate the Amendment’s development and relevance to federalism in the United States.","PeriodicalId":247232,"journal":{"name":"Federalism-E","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tenth Amendment\",\"authors\":\"L. Ackerman\",\"doi\":\"10.24908/fede.v20i1.13178\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper argues that the Tenth Amendment was a beneficial compromise between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, and as a result the Amendment is not a truism, but instead integral to securing state sovereignty and protecting the integrity of federalism.  The paper begins by describing the historical context for the inclusion of the Amendment and the framers’ reasoning for its inclusion. The paper continues on to evaluate the Amendment from its conception until present day. The paper refutes the Amendment as a truism, displaying how the Supreme Court has significantly developed the relevance and use of the Amendment through two major time periods: the interwar period and the years following the Supreme Court case Schechter Corp. v. United States. A variety of Supreme Court cases, peer reviewed articles, and recently published news articles are employed to illustrate the Amendment’s development and relevance to federalism in the United States.\",\"PeriodicalId\":247232,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Federalism-E\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Federalism-E\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24908/fede.v20i1.13178\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Federalism-E","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24908/fede.v20i1.13178","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文认为,第十修正案是联邦主义者和反联邦主义者之间有益的妥协,因此,该修正案不是真理,而是确保国家主权和保护联邦制完整性的组成部分。本文首先描述了纳入修正案的历史背景和制宪者的理由。本文继续对该修正案从构思到现在进行了评价。这篇论文驳斥了修正案是不言自明的,并展示了最高法院如何通过两个主要时期(两次世界大战之间的时期和最高法院谢克特公司诉美国案之后的几年)显著地发展了修正案的相关性和使用。本文采用了一系列最高法院的案例、同行评议的文章和最近发表的新闻文章来说明修正案的发展及其与美国联邦制的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Tenth Amendment
This paper argues that the Tenth Amendment was a beneficial compromise between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, and as a result the Amendment is not a truism, but instead integral to securing state sovereignty and protecting the integrity of federalism.  The paper begins by describing the historical context for the inclusion of the Amendment and the framers’ reasoning for its inclusion. The paper continues on to evaluate the Amendment from its conception until present day. The paper refutes the Amendment as a truism, displaying how the Supreme Court has significantly developed the relevance and use of the Amendment through two major time periods: the interwar period and the years following the Supreme Court case Schechter Corp. v. United States. A variety of Supreme Court cases, peer reviewed articles, and recently published news articles are employed to illustrate the Amendment’s development and relevance to federalism in the United States.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信