Research Paper on:
Federalist Papers and U.S. Legal System Evolution

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
Constitutional representation possible. While addressing this issue of leadership, Madison stated that educated and compassionate compatriots would not always occupy the top position. This fact, in and of  itself, was reason enough for the Constitution to address such issues by limiting potential harm done by inadequate or corrupt leaders. "In the first place it is to be  remembered that the general government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and administering laws" (Hamilton et al 14).  Hamilton effectively summed up the Federalist viewpoint when he remarked that the countrys laws could not be so numerous as to confuse or befuddle the populace. If they are  so disorderly as to be misunderstood or if they represent various and sundry modifications without merit, then no person of decent intelligence would ever be able to interpret them.  The Federalists better reflected the original principles of the Declaration than did the Anti-Federalists. As well, the situation was not conducive for small republics, a point that the Federalists  realized right from the start. Upon examining the legal systems evolution since the Federalist Papers, the student will want to begin with New  Nationalism from the Roosevelt Administration, progressively moving forward to contemporary concerns about judicial activism and judicial restrain. The student will likely discover that the legal system is an entity  comprised of individual human beings who attest to provide protection for the masses. This may be true in theory but the truth of the matter is that the courts  have gained far too much influence over peoples lives in their ongoing quest for civil harmony. "...The federal courts, composed of unelected judges, are the least democratic branch of