The constitutional text

Article I · Section 10

Select any highlighted phrase to understand what it means.

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it’s inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

Source: National Constitution Center edition. Original wording is preserved; commentary explains historical and superseded provisions.

Go at your own pace

You don’t have to understand everything at once. One connection is a good beginning.

LOOK A LITTLE CLOSER

Article I, Section 10, Clause 1e

A restriction on state legal tender

Current text
make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts;

What it means

States may not make anything other than gold and silver coin legal tender for paying debts. Legal tender concerns what the law recognizes as sufficient payment, not everything people may voluntarily exchange.

Historical setting

The provision accompanied restrictions on state paper money and laws impairing contracts. Federalist 44 criticized policies that changed the practical value of obligations and unsettled economic trust.

What it does

The wording is directed to states, and should not be silently transferred to Congress as if Article I contained the same sentence about federal power. Modern national currency raises a separate constitutional and statutory analysis.

Debate & interpretation

The historical concern involved debtors, creditors, and political efforts to redistribute burdens by changing payment rules. The rule limits one instrument of state intervention rather than resolving every controversy about monetary policy.

A common misreading

This state restriction does not itself prove that all federal paper currency is unconstitutional or that private barter is forbidden.

Think it through

Why does changing what must be accepted as payment affect the substance of a contract even if its written amount stays the same?

Follow the connection

Sources & further reading

Original Madison Center commentary. Explanations distinguish the text, historical context, and interpretive disagreements.

Sign in to save