Skip to content

14 · The convention route: the United States, 1787

This course is open while its review is still in progress. Every course here gets a source-by-source citation review before it is marked reviewed; this one has not finished that process yet. How review works

The first case is the oldest codified national constitution still in force, and it is the model of the convention route: a gathering of delegates drafts a text, and a separate ratification process turns the draft into higher law. The two-step shape, draft then ratify, is the lesson.

The setting: a convention that exceeded its instructions

By the mid-1780s the United States was governed under the Articles of Confederation, a weak league of states with no real central executive or power to tax. In May 1787, delegates gathered in Philadelphia. Their official charge was narrow: to REVISE the Articles. Instead, behind closed doors over the summer, they scrapped the Articles and drafted an entirely new frame of government. The Convention finished and the delegates signed the text on 17 September 1787 (U.S. Const.; The Federalist, 1788).

This is the first place to teach a contested point rather than smooth it. Because the Convention was authorised only to amend the Articles and instead replaced them, and because the Articles required unanimous consent of all thirteen states to change while the new Constitution declared it would take effect among nine, some at the time (and some scholars since) argue the Convention acted beyond its lawful authority, a "runaway convention." The counter-argument is that ratification by specially elected state conventions, going straight to the people rather than the state legislatures, supplied a fresh and higher source of authority, which is the constituent-power idea from Lesson 13 in action. State the fact plainly: the Convention exceeded its instructions, and whether that was a lawful revolution or an unlawful coup dressed as drafting is a genuine and old debate.

Ratification: the second step that made it law

A drafted text is not yet a constitution. The Framers wrote the rule for turning it into one into the document itself. Article VII provided that "the Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same" (U.S. Const. art. VII). Ratification ran through specially elected state conventions, not the existing legislatures, and it was a real fight:

BeatWhat happened
The debateFederalists (for) and Anti-Federalists (against) argued it out in print and in the state conventions
The FederalistHamilton, Madison, and Jay published essays defending the plan (The Federalist, 1787 to 1788)
The ninth stateNew Hampshire ratified on 21 June 1788, meeting the Article VII threshold
The Bill of RightsTo answer Anti-Federalist fears, the first ten amendments were ratified in 1791

New Hampshire, the ninth state, is the moment the Constitution became law, though the large states of Virginia and New York ratified soon after and mattered enormously to whether it would actually work.

What the convention route teaches

Three transferable lessons. First, drafting and ratifying are separate acts, and a constitution needs both: a text, and a legitimate process that adopts it. Second, the ratification rule lives inside the document, so the Constitution partly authorised its own coming-into-force (Article VII), which is the bootstrap problem being solved in real time. Third, the Bill of Rights shows a constitution can be completed in stages: the original 1787 text distributed power, and the 1791 amendments added the "limit" job (Lesson 2) that ratification had demanded. A convention produced the machine; ratification switched it on; amendment finished it. This is historical and structural description, not legal advice.

Sources

Also saves the next lesson, so you can keep going offline.