But did a breach occur? Some constitutional scholars say that indeed it did, and perhaps on purpose. One such scholar is Yale University Law Professor, Dr. Akhil Reed Amar, author of the book, America's Constitution: A Biography. In his biography of the Constitution, Amar submits that the intent behind the terms of the Constitution, was to completely replace the nation known as the United States of America, as it might have been under the Articles of Confederation and Declaration of Independence, with an entirely 'new' nation, one which would possess no political or authoritative ties to that previous, but afterward extinct, organization. On page 27 Dr. Amar writes:
...so the phrase, "United States," in the Constitution meant something different and much stronger than did the same syllables in the earlier document. It is only a happy coincidence that the same thirteen "United States" from the Declaration and the Articles became the first thirteen "United States" in the Constitution...Thus the preamble spoke precisely of its new purpose to "form" a new--more perfect--union rather than simply "continue" or "improve" the old union.And on page 33, Dr. Amar writes:
...so now a new United States Constitution--the new supreme law of the land--would shape a new continental nation whose sovereign would be a truly continental people.So according to Dr. Amar, a man whom many of his peers recognize 'among the 20 top contemporary US legal thinkers,' the Declaration of Independence was a revolutionary document for a now extinct nation. According to Dr. Amar, there is no sovereign authority under the Constitution which derives from the Declaration of Independence, one result plainly being that, instead of God's sovereignty over the United States, the sovereign is a 'truly continental people.'
Next time we will delve further into Dr. Amar's profound thinking, and begin to unravel its pitfalls.
Stay tuned...don't change that channel.