preview

Bill Of Rights Vs Anti Federalism

Decent Essays

Federalism is the division of powers among local, state, and national governments. Although, Anti-Federalists had a lot of good points, Federalists’ belief in a strong central government, limited powers, and no need for the Bill of Rights, is why it is the better stance. Topics discussed in this essay will be the difference between Federalism and Anti-Federalism, each side’s opinions on the Bill of Rights, and why Federalism is the better side to be on.
For the ratification of the Constitution to happen, nine out of the thirteen states had to approve of it. This divided the delegates into two separate groups, Federalists and Anti-Federalists. Federalists wanted a strong central government and immediate ratification of the Constitution. Conversely, Anti-Federalists wanted power in the states, not the central government, “It is true this government is limited to certain objects, or to speak more properly, some small degree of power is still left to the states,” (Brutus I). Also, they favored the Articles of Confederation due to the Bill of Rights. On the other hand, Federalists disagreed with including the Bill of Rights because of the possibility of it backfiring in future generations. …show more content…

Why for instance, should it be said, that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed?” (Federalist No. 84). Federalists thought listing rights in the document could allow the government to justify limiting a right because it does not appear in print. However, without the promise of the Bill of Rights, many Anti-Federalists would have not ratified the

Get Access