How was the Bill of Rights a compromise between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists?
Anti-Federalists feared that the Constitution would lead to an over-centralized government and diminish individual rights and liberties. The Federalists agreed to support the proposed amendments, specifically a Bill of Rights. Following this compromise, Massachusetts voted to ratify the Constitution on February 6, 1788.
How did the Federalists counter the argument for a Bill of Rights?
Antifederalists argued that a bill of rights was necessary because the Supremacy Clause, in combination with the Necessary and Proper and General Welfare Clauses, would allow implied powers that could endanger rights. Federalists rejected the suggestion that a bill of rights was needed.
How did the bill enable the Anti-Federalists to support the Constitution?
Anti-Federalists in Massachusetts, Virginia, and New York, three crucial states, made ratification of the Constitution conditional on a Bill of Rights. They include the right to freedom of expression, the right to a speedy trial, the right to a fair trial under the law, and protection from cruel and unusual punishment.
How did the bill of rights come about?
The Senate amended the joint resolution to consist of 12 amendments. On October 2, 1789, President Washington sent copies of the 12 amendments passed by Congress to the states. By December 15, 1791, three-quarters of the states had ratified 10 of these, now known as the "Bill of Rights."
Federalists argued that the Constitution did not need a Bill of Rights because the people and the states retained all powers not granted to the federal government. Anti-Federalists believed that a bill of rights was necessary to protect individual liberty.
What was the solution to the federalist and anti-federalist debates?
In the long run, the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist ended up compromising on one solution. This solution was to add a Bill of Rights to the Constitution to protect the rights of the people. In conclusion, the debate between Federalist and Anti-Federalist shaped the way our government functions today.
What was the debate over the ratification of the constitution?
The debate over the ratification of the US Constitution is notable for the sharp divide it created among the people of the newly independent states. Two groups, the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, emerged, with the Federalists arguing for ratification and the Anti-Federalists arguing against ratification.
What did the Federalist papers say about the Constitution?
The debate also centered on the constitution itself; Federalists believed that the document should be ratified, while the Anti-Federalists were more skeptical. The debate took place both in public speeches and written arguments. The Federalist Papers were created to argue for a stronger central government.
View full lesson: http://ed.ted.com/lessons/why-wasn-t-the-bill-of-rights-originally-in-the-us-constitution-james-collWhen you think of the US Constitution, …