Provide two (2) reasons why amending the U.S. Constitution would be necessary versus passing a law. Include Marbury v. Madison and U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton.
Two reasons why amending the U.S. Constitution might be necessary instead of passing a law are as follows:
1. To address fundamental rights and principles: The Constitution serves as the cornerstone of the United States' legal and governmental system. Amending the Constitution allows for modifications and updates to the fundamental rights and principles upon which the country is built, ensuring they remain relevant and reflective of the evolving society.
One significant example is the landmark Supreme Court case of Marbury v. Madison (1803). This case established the principle of judicial review, which empowers the Court to interpret the Constitution and declare laws unconstitutional. This decision greatly influenced the balance of power between the three branches of government and shaped the legal framework of the country. If the Constitution did not allow for amendments, this vital ruling clarifying the court's authority would not have been possible.
2. To settle divisive and contentious issues: Constitutional amendments are generally more difficult to pass compared to regular legislation. To propose an amendment, a two-thirds majority vote is required in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, followed by ratification by three-fourths of the states. This demanding process ensures that only issues with broad consensus and importance endure as amendments.
U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton (1995) is an example where a constitutional amendment became necessary. The case involved an Arkansas state law that imposed term limits on members of Congress. The Supreme Court held that state-imposed term limits were unconstitutional, arguing that they conflicted with the qualifications for the U.S. Congress as outlined in the Constitution. Consequently, proponents of term limits faced significant obstacles in passing a federal law due to the Court's interpretation. To override the Court's decision, a constitutional amendment would be needed, involving the lengthy and rigorous amendment process.
In summary, amending the U.S. Constitution is necessary in certain situations to address fundamental rights and principles and to settle divisive issues that cannot be resolved through regular legislation. These two reasons were evident in Supreme Court cases like Marbury v. Madison and U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton.