The US Constitution | Period 3: 1754-1800 | AP US History | Khan Academy
Articles Blog

The US Constitution | Period 3: 1754-1800 | AP US History | Khan Academy

September 15, 2019


Only registered users can comment.

  1. too bad the founding fathers couldn't do something to prevent money from hijacking the system they created

  2. You do not sound as though you have an understanding of what you're reading/saying. Cringing. Awkward "listen."

  3. I thought these videos were supposed to be better, more interesting than a regular class lesson? This is just as boring as civics class.

  4. US Constitution and Quiz
    Check your knowledge on US Constitution and challenge your friends. Lets check it out.
    https://goo.gl/jZKYhr

  5. After article 1 was created, the developers of the constitution saw that something was missing…which was established in article 2?

    Question 2 options:

    Senate

    Executive

    Legislative

    Judicial

    help! which one?

  6. “But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in Court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution. The Constitution, it is true, is a compact, but he is not a party to it. The States are the parties to it. And they may complain. If they do, they are entitled to redress. Or they may waive the right to complain. If they do, the right stands waived. Could not the States, in their sovereign capacities, or Congress (if it has the power) as their agent, forgive such a breach of the Constitution, on the part of a State, as that of imposing a tax on imports, or accept reparation for it? In case this were done, what would become of the claims of private persons, for damages for such breach? To let such claims be set up against the forgiven party, would be to do away with the forgiveness. No, if there existed such claimants, they would have to appeal, each to his own sovereign for redress. It was that sovereign's business to get enough from the offending sovereign, to cover all private losses of his own citizens-and if he did not get enough to do that, those citizens must look to him, alone for indemnity.”

    Padelford, Fay & Co. v. Mayor and Aldermen of City of Savannah 14 Ga. 438, 1854 WL 1492 (Ga.)

  7. the system is mess up, if they really wanted a system of check and balance only one one branch of government would have suffice to be able to override the other like in rock. paper. scissor
    you would have Legislative <Judicial< Executive < Legislative
    in other world before the executive branch could enforce the laws they would have to wait for the judicial to judge law made by the legislative branch constitutional or unconstitutional
    and the legislative branch should be able to make laws unless the executive branch request law to solve an issue
    and the judicial would prevent the executive branch from implementing and unfair system of law, and the legislative wouldn't be able to pass law that favor them. if you pay attention to the video you will see the system is design to obstruct and the only way to get everyone to collaborate is to bribe everyone with money and power. congress give the president enough power so he can be blame if the president is from the opposite party, and be a puppet if the president is from the same party, use cronyism to appoint judges.
    that why nothing gets done or change. and honestly how will you get 600+ people to cooperate in the legislator branch

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *