Date of Award

5-2025

Degree Type

Thesis

Degree Name

Departmental Honors

Department

Political Science

Abstract

The Federalist Papers are widely known as they helped explain the Constitution and gather support for its ratification. However, what they mean is not always clear. This is problematic, especially when Supreme Court Justices look to the Federalist Papers to help them make decisions. A particularly fascinating example of this problem arose in the case Printz v. United States (1997). Both the majority and dissent argued that their interpretation was supported by Federalist No. 27. That leads to the question of what Federalist No. 27 actually means. By looking at the context surrounding Alexander Hamilton (the author) and previous Supreme Court usage, this question can be answered. This research finds that Federalist No. 27 started with broad powers which were trimmed down by the Supreme Court over time.

Share

COinS
 

Faculty Mentor

Robert Ross

Departmental Honors Advisor

Greg Goelzhauser

Capstone Committee Member

Anthony Peacock