Arguments Against The Constitution Of The United States
The Constitution of the United States established a fundamental law that guaranteed basic rights for the people of America. The Constitution was ratified on September 17, 1787 in the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. At the convention, delegates wanted to make a strong federal government that has three branches; executive, legislative, and judicial, and a check and balances so no branch would override the other. The creation of the Constitution ensured unity in the United States, but there were people who opposed this kind of government. Federalists were a group of people that believed the Constitution would strengthen the National Government. The federalists wanted a weaker state government and a stronger central government. Although the federalists and the antifederalists has some agreeable political thought they stand on totally different
…show more content…
grounds.
The antifederalists were a group of people who were against the ratification of the Constitution. They wanted more power in the states, and less power in the central government. The antifederalists argued that the Constitution is giving the national government too much power, that the bill of rights was needed, and if the Constitution would stay as the republican government. They viewed the Constitution as a threat to the rights of the individuals. They believed with this kind of government, the United States was once going to fall down to a tyrannical regime again. Thus, the Anti-federalist opposed the Constitution in the belief that the rights of the states and citizens can be jeopardized with a stronger national government. The anti-federalist believed that since the Constitution gave the central government too much power, if there wasn’t a Bill of Rights citizens can be abused.
(Kernall, Samuel)
The anti-federalists were afraid of the power granted to the national government. Many anti-federalists believed that this power was similar to the tyrannical power as the British monarchy. The Anti-federalist was against the growth of the national power. They liked governments that were small and had limited national power. The Anti-federalist argued that the Constitution was going to make the new federal government much stronger than the state government. They instead wanted a strong state government. However, federalists believed that after a failed Articles of Confederation a strong national government was necessary to thrive as a country. The federalists argued that the national government was limited and only had certain powers and was prohibited from doing everything. The anti-federalists felt that the Constitution supplied to much power for the federal courts. However, the federalist assert that federal courts actually had limited authority, and equal power is distributed to the state and local courts.
grounds.
The antifederalists were a group of people who were against the ratification of the Constitution. They wanted more power in the states, and less power in the central government. The antifederalists argued that the Constitution is giving the national government too much power, that the bill of rights was needed, and if the Constitution would stay as the republican government. They viewed the Constitution as a threat to the rights of the individuals. They believed with this kind of government, the United States was once going to fall down to a tyrannical regime again. Thus, the Anti-federalist opposed the Constitution in the belief that the rights of the states and citizens can be jeopardized with a stronger national government. The anti-federalist believed that since the Constitution gave the central government too much power, if there wasn’t a Bill of Rights citizens can be abused.
(Kernall, Samuel)
The anti-federalists were afraid of the power granted to the national government. Many anti-federalists believed that this power was similar to the tyrannical power as the British monarchy. The Anti-federalist was against the growth of the national power. They liked governments that were small and had limited national power. The Anti-federalist argued that the Constitution was going to make the new federal government much stronger than the state government. They instead wanted a strong state government. However, federalists believed that after a failed Articles of Confederation a strong national government was necessary to thrive as a country. The federalists argued that the national government was limited and only had certain powers and was prohibited from doing everything. The anti-federalists felt that the Constitution supplied to much power for the federal courts. However, the federalist assert that federal courts actually had limited authority, and equal power is distributed to the state and local courts.