Anti-Federalists vs. Federalists

Anti-Federalists Most Americans are suspicious of government Anti-Federalists were the most extreme of them Constitution created a government people could not control

Anti-Federalists Three main questions regarding the Constitution: Would the new Constitution maintain a republican form of government? Would the federal government have too much power? Was a bill of rights needed in the Constitution?

Anti-Federalists Constituition… …should have been open to public observation during drafting …would undermine a republican form of government …gave too much power to the national government …allowed an army to be kept during peacetime …did not include a bill of rights

Anti-Federalists Why fear a strong national government? Limit natural rights Safe government: Local and closely linked with the will of the people Controlled by the people (yearly elections; replacing people in key positions often)

Anti-Federalists Why should we have a bill of rights? Federal government was too removed from daily life Federal government’s power was too vague “proper and necessary” laws Nothing to stop federal government from violating rights “constantly keeping in view…the particular principles on which our freedom must always depend.” (Center for Civic Education, p. 86)

Federalists Representation of different interests in the government will protect basic rights Government organization will protect basic rights Civic Virtue of citizens could not be relied on

Federalists Legislative – Protect local interests (House of Reps); Protect state interests (Senate) Executive – Protect the national interest Judicial branch – Protect the people’s fundamental interests

Federalists Bill of Rights Constitution already protected many specific rights (habeas corpus, trial by jury, protection against treasonous accusations, etc.) Don’t need bill of rights in a nation with popular sovereignty Federal government does not have the power to deprive people of rights Impossible to list all rights