The Ratification doc plainly reads:
“the powers granted under the Constitution being derived from the People of the United States may be resumed by them”
“them” can only refer to the immediately previous “People of the United States” no one else. These were lawyers that wrote the doc, they wouldn’t have made such a mistake.
The purpose is obvious, the Constitution was created by all the “People of the United States” and can only be undone by amending the Constitution.
How could the Federalist papers be evidence of any agreement, as they were written before ratification agreements happened? They certainly influenced the ratification writings, nothing more.
The Ratification doc plainly reads:
“the powers granted under the Constitution being derived from the People of the United States may be resumed by them”
“them” can only refer to the immediately previous “People of the United States” no one else. These were lawyers that wrote the doc, they wouldn’t have made such a mistake.
The purpose is obvious, the Constitution was created by all the “People of the United States” and can only be undone by amending the Constitution.
How could the Federalist papers be evidence of any agreement, as they were written before ratification agreements happened? They certainly influenced the ratification writings, nothing more.
Re-read Federalist #39. The People refers to the people of each state which was a single sovereign community. There was no “whole people” of the United States. The reference to the people in the provisos IS the people of each state or in the case of each of the provisos the people of their own state.