"The Declaration of Independence may carry little weight in the courts; it may for all its being placed at the head of the Statutes at Large and described in the United States Code as part of the "organic law," have no legally binding.
The article is from Dennis J. Mahoney and it's just titled Declaration of Independence.
Also, what does this mean?
James Madison said it's "the fundamental Act of Union of these states."
2006-10-04
10:02:49
·
5 answers
·
asked by
Twilight Is Love
1
in
Arts & Humanities
➔ History
can your explanations be a little shorter.? thnx
2006-10-04
10:31:13 ·
update #1
The Declaration if Independence is an article that is revered, mainly for it's age and what was originally written. However, over the years politicians have changed its original meaning to cover up their own shortcomings and greed. Originally this document said that if there came a time that the Declaration did not work, then it should be scrapped and a new Declaration should be written to cover the times people are now living in. But, politicians changed that through an amendment that says to change the Declaration of Independence makes you a traitor to your country and you should suffer the full penalties under law. But the laws were made by these self-same people to favor their agendas and not those of the common people.
2006-10-04 10:11:44
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Let's place the Declaration of Independence in the context of the time. It was written prior to the Constitution of the United States, and operated as a declaration by the colonies that they were independent states. It's important to remember that the Declaration of Independence is not the originating document or constitution of the United States nor did it form a union of states. It acted as a tool to announce that ties with England had been severed.
Before the Declaration the States were loosely affiliated by the Committee of Correspondence, which subsequently led to the creation of the First Continental Congress which drafted the Articles of Association. The Articles of Association, and the Declaration of Independence, attempted to obtain redress from the British Parliment and King and were a list of what the Colonies felt needed to be corrected. The Declaration of Independence went further and declared independence. The Declaration of Independence was followed by the Articles of Confederation. At the time of the Declaration of Independence the Colonies were governed by the Articles of Association. Shortly after the Declaration they were governed by the Articles of Confederation. It wasn't until the Constitution was drafted in 1787 and ratified in 1789 that we officially became the United States of America. It is that context that we must recognize that the Declaration of Independence is not legally binding. It wasn't done under the Constitution of the United States, and is no more binding than any other act done by any other government prior to our becoming a country. So, we recognize it as a major document that played an important role in our obtaining our independence but to recognize the Declaration of Independence as legally binding even though done by a different government would open the door to any and all acts prior to the Constitution which were done by the various Continental Congresses to a binding nature.
When James Madison said the Declaration of the Independence was the "fundamental Act of Union of these states" he was referring to the nature of the declaration and the impact it had on establishing us in the words of the Declaration as a union of states, "We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the Rectitude of our Intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly Publish and Declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be, free and independent states; that they are absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political Connection between them and the State of Great-Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which independent states may of right do." It was the Declaration that was the "fundamental Act" that bound us together as the United Colonies or the United States. Not the United States of America, but the united States or the states united.
2006-10-04 17:29:02
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Declaration of Independence let England know that the US wanted to become a soveriegn nation and govern itself. Don't get it confused with the Constitution that provides the laws of our nation. The Declaration is considered "organic law" since we know it exists, respect what it says, and abide by its ideas, but if it really came down to it, it isn't legally binding in court. It's the fundamental act of union of these states because it is the basis for creating a union. It's sort of how the world fornd out that this was the plan!
2006-10-04 17:13:07
·
answer #3
·
answered by tsopolly 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
The DOI was written for the sake of stating that we are now becoming a united country of our own and states the who, what, where, when and why. But our law is primarily based off the Constitution which goes into far greater detail about how the country is supposed to be run. The quote just means that the foundation of what our country stands upon is in the DOI, organic law means what the DOI stated, we all have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Other than that the constitution is the primary law of the land.
2006-10-05 10:31:50
·
answer #4
·
answered by calicheese3 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Mainly, the Declaration of Independence is a historical document with little relevance to today. Because we have all sorts of laws which limit our liberty and property (pursuit of happiness). The word "rights" as Jefferson, Adams, Sherman, Franklin, and Williamson meant it in the DoI is much different than what we call "civil rights and liberties" today.
Simply put, it is an outdated document which is only relevant when talking about the founding of our nation, not when talking about contemporary issues.
have a nice day.
2006-10-04 18:25:15
·
answer #5
·
answered by mjtpopus 3
·
0⤊
0⤋