What Is Article 4 of the Constitution

At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, a proposal to include the phrase “the new States shall be admitted under the same conditions as the original States” was rejected. It was feared that the political power of the future new Western states would eventually overwhelm that of the established Eastern states. However, once the new constitution went into effect, Congress admitted Vermont and Kentucky on an equal footing, and then formalized the condition in its admission files for subsequent states, declaring that the new state would take effect “in all respects on an equal footing with the home states.” Thus, using the discretion granted by the authors, Congress adopted a policy of equal status for all newly admitted states. [7] With the increase in support for states` rights in the pre-war period, the Supreme Court in Lessee of Pollard v. Hagan (1845),[9] that the constitution required the admission of new states on the basis of equality. [10] Under a parallel clause in Article 1, Section Eight, the Supreme Court ruled that states cannot tax such federal property. In another case, Kleppe v. In New Mexico, the court ruled that the federal Wild Horse and Burro Act was a constitutional exercise of Congress` power under the property clause — at least to the extent that it was applied to finding trespassing. The case prohibited entry into U.S. public lands and the removal of wild burros under New Mexico`s Estray Act. [16] The Constitution is silent on whether a state can unilaterally leave or secede from the Union.

However, the Supreme Court ruled in Texas v. White (1869) that a state cannot do this unilaterally. [11] The Constitution does not explain what exactly constitutes a republican form of government. However, there are several places where the principles underlying the concept are articulated. Article seven, the last and shortest of the original articles of the constitution, stipulated that before the constitution could be presented as a “law of the land”, it had to obtain the consent of the people by being ratified by popular congresses in the various states. Because it required the ratification of only nine states to establish itself, rather than the unanimous consent required in the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution was more republican, as it protected the majority from being effectively governed or imprisoned by the minority. [18] The U.S. Constitution is the oldest constitution in the world still actively used. It was written in 1787 and officially ratified in 1788.

The Article IV guarantee clause requires states to apply a “republican form of government,” meaning they must apply the electoral process. A single state cannot decide to be a monarchy, even if the people vote for it. However, the Supreme Court has interpreted the safeguard clause so that states can choose the type of electoral procedure they use. As James Madison wrote in the Federalist Papers, “states may choose to replace other Republican forms.” A political crisis in Rhode Island in the 1840s, the Dorr Rebellion, forced the Supreme Court to rule on the meaning of this clause. At the time, the Constitution of Rhode Island was the old royal charter introduced in the 17th century. In the 1840s, only 40 percent of free white men in the state had the right to vote. An attempt to hold a popular convention to draft a new constitution was declared insurrection by the Charter government, and the leaders of Congress were arrested. One of them filed a lawsuit in federal court, arguing that the Rhode Island government was not “Republican” in character and that his arrest (and all other acts of the government) was invalid. In Luther v.

Borden,[19] the Court held that deciding whether a state government is a legitimate republican form, as guaranteed by the Constitution, is a political question to be resolved by Congress. In fact, the Court ruled that the clause was not justiciable. A hastily formed provisional Virginia legislature was formed in Wheeling, Virginia. It officially authorized the formation of the state and technically satisfied the requirements of the Constitution that the state and Congress must approve a measure to form a new state within its borders. Whether this meets the conditions set out in that clause is still disputed. The creation of West Virginia as a state was a little different than in other states because it was part of Virginia. The United States was in the midst of a civil war, and the people of the western mountainous region of Virginia asked Abraham Lincoln to form a state separate from Virginia. Part of the reason is that they were steadfast against slavery.

But unfortunately, while the measure received congressional approval after the secession of the Confederate states, it unfortunately had no chance of gaining approval from the Virginia legislature, which is currently in rebellion. This clause, commonly referred to as the property clause or “territorial clause,” grants Congress constitutional authority to administer and control any territory or other property right owned by the United States. In addition, the clause also states that nothing in the Constitution should be construed as harming (undermining) a claim of the United States or any particular state. The exact scope of this clause has long been disputed. Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution deals with the roles and responsibilities of individual states. This was a subject of great importance when it was written, given the growing power enjoyed by states in the run-up to the civil war. Article 4 of the Constitution protects citizens and the Länder through the Federal Government. The reasons of the governor requesting extradition should not be questioned. The accused cannot defend himself against the charges brought against him in the State of extradition; The refugee must do so in the receiving State. However, the accused may prevent extradition by presenting clear evidence that he or she was not in the State from which he or she allegedly fled at the time of the offence.

[3] There is no constitutional requirement that extradited refugees be tried only for crimes specified in the extradition proceedings. The full faith and credit clause is an essential element of constitutional law, but it is most often used in the context of family law. For example, the Violence Against Women Act invokes the full faith and credit clause to require states to comply with child protection orders and custody orders issued in various states. Before same-sex marriage became legal nationwide, legal scholars considered whether the full faith and credit clause requires states that prohibit same-sex marriage to recognize marriages contracted in other states. In the mid-1990s, the Defense of Marriage Act attempted to legislate on the issue, but was ultimately struck down under the Constitution`s equality clause rather than the full faith and credit clause. The public documents, records and judicial proceedings of all other States enjoy full trust and recognition in each State. And Congress may, by general law, prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and procedures are to be proved, and their effect. In Mills v.

Duryee, an 1813 New York case, was interpreted by the Supreme Court to mean that one state cannot reopen a court case that another state has resolved. In a later case, however, the Court created the “public policy” exception to the full faith and credit clause – noting that the Constitution does not require a state to replace the law of another state with its own. In other words, where there is a conflict of laws, a State may choose to give priority to its own laws over those of another State. Article Four requires the United States to protect each state from invasion and, at the request of the state legislature (or the executive branch if the legislature cannot be convened), from domestic violence. This provision was invoked by Woodrow Wilson during the Colorado coal strike in 1914. [22] Article 4, Section 2, Clause 3 is the fugitive slave clause. The fugitive slave clause prohibits slaves from escaping their slavery by fleeing their state to another state, even if the state to which they fled prohibits slavery. The authorities of the state where the slave walked were obliged to return them to their original owner.

Porównaj