hist.g5.s.civ.washington_adams_jefferson_precedents
Analyze the first three presidencies — Washington (1789-1797) precedents + Whiskey Rebellion + Farewell Address / Adams (1797-1801) Alien and Sedition Acts / Jefferson (1801-1809) Louisiana Purchase + Lewis and Clark + Embargo Act + Marbury v. Madison 1803
Describe the first three presidencies as the period of constitutional precedent-setting: (a) WASHINGTON 1789-1797: established the CABINET (Hamilton Treasury + Jefferson State + Knox War + Randolph AG); 'Mr. President' over Adams's preferred 'His Highness'; resisted being addressed as a king; addressed Whiskey Rebellion 1794 (Western Pennsylvania farmer protest against federal excise tax) by personally leading 13,000 militia — establishing federal authority to enforce its own laws; Bank of the United States 1791 (Hamilton-Jefferson cabinet debate on constitutionality + 'necessary and proper' precedent); Proclamation of Neutrality 1793 in French Revolutionary Wars; TWO-TERM PRECEDENT — declined a third term; Farewell Address 1796 (warning against parties, sectionalism, foreign entanglement); (b) ADAMS 1797-1801: XYZ Affair 1797-98 with France; Quasi-War 1798-1800 (undeclared naval conflict); ALIEN AND SEDITION ACTS 1798 — Alien Enemies Act + Alien Friends Act + Naturalization Act + SEDITION ACT criminalizing critical speech against the federal government; ~25 prosecutions under Sedition Act including Vermont Congressman Matthew Lyon — explicit VIOLATION of 1st Amendment; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798 (Jefferson + Madison arguing states could 'nullify' unconstitutional federal laws — first nullification doctrine, returns in 1832); peaceful transfer of power Adams to Jefferson 1801 — the first time in modern history power transferred between political opponents; (c) JEFFERSON 1801-1809: MARBURY v. MADISON 1803 — Chief Justice John Marshall establishes judicial review (the third branch's power to declare laws unconstitutional); LOUISIANA PURCHASE 1803 — Jefferson bought 828,000 square miles from Napoleonic France for $15 million (~4 cents/acre) doubling US territory; LEWIS AND CLARK EXPEDITION 1804-1806 (review of G4-Spring 4-perspective routine — Lewis/Clark + Sacagawea Lemhi Shoshone + York enslaved attendant of Clark + host Indigenous nations Mandan/Hidatsa/Nez Perce/Clatsop/Chinook); EMBARGO ACT 1807 — Jefferson's failed attempt to use trade as foreign-policy leverage; Burr Conspiracy 1807. Apply MG-7 routine to Farewell Address excerpt, Sedition Act of 1798 text, Marbury v. Madison majority opinion key passage (simplified for G5).
- Explain the six core constitutional principles — federalism, separation of powers, checks and balances, popular sovereignty, limited government, judicial review — with concrete examples for each, via iCivics 'Branches of Power' simulation
- Explain each of the 10 amendments of the Bill of Rights (ratified December 15 1791) — with developmentally appropriate scenario examples for each — using the iCivics 'You've Got Rights!' framework
- Analyze Tecumseh's Confederacy (1809-1813) and the War of 1812 — Madison's presidency, Tecumseh's pan-Indigenous resistance, Battle of Tippecanoe 1811, US declaration of war 1812, burning of Washington 1814, Battle of New Orleans 1815, Treaty of Ghent 1814
- Analyze the Monroe presidency (1817-1825) — Era of Good Feelings, Monroe Doctrine 1823, Missouri Compromise 1820 (also under Skill 11) — and the Adams-Onís Treaty 1819 (Spanish Florida)
- Believing Washington 'invented' the cabinet — the cabinet emerged from the Constitution's mention of 'principal Officer in each of the executive Departments' in Article II §2.
- Forgetting the Alien and Sedition Acts violated the 1st Amendment — explicit free-speech violation by the same generation that wrote it.
- Treating Louisiana Purchase as uncomplicated — Jefferson himself doubted its constitutionality (no enumerated power to buy territory) but did it anyway under the 'treaty power' workaround.
- Missing that Marbury v. Madison 1803 was the SUPREME COURT case that established judicial review — the Constitution does not say the Court can strike down laws; Marshall's opinion did.