Strict_Vs._Loose_Constructionists

Strict Vs. Loose Constructionists During the period of 1801-1817, the clash of the Republican views on the constitution were argued against the opinions of the Federalist. The Republicans believed in interpreting the constitution strictly, meaning that Congress or the President define the constitution as is- word for word, while the Federalist party held the opinions of broad constructionists, that Congress or the President had the right to interpret the constitution based on connotation. The Jeffersonian Republicans are usually characterized as strict constructionists who were opposed to broad constructionism of the Federalists. During the presidencies of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, this characterization is only true to a certain extent because despite their opposition against broad constructionism, they both found the need to follow the Republican path when stepping up to power as President. There is proof that Jefferson can be verified as a strict constructionist. In document B, Jefferson states to Samuel Miller that, “I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institution, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises…” Jefferson believed that certainly no power should decree any religious action, or to assume authority in religious discipline. Jefferson believed that the jefferson, constitution, madison, bank, strict, broad, president, constructionist, constructionism, states, religious, power, opinions, new, found, constructionists, because, word, without, thomas, one, old, land, james, himself, government, federalist, document, country, congress, buy, believed, been, against, views