Introducing
Your new presentation assistant.
Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.
Trending searches
Federalists
Vs.
Anti-Federalists
The executive branch held too much power.
There was no bill of rights.
It gave too much power to the national
government at the expense of the state governments.
Of these complaints, the lack of a bill of rights was the most effective. The American people had just fought a war to defend their rights, and they did not want an intimidating national government taking those rights away again. The lack of a bill of rights was the FOCUS of the Anti-Federalist campaign against ratification.
The Federalists, on the other hand,
had answers to all of the Anti-Federalist
complaints. Among them:
A listing of rights can be a dangerous thing. If the national government were to protect specific listed rights, what would stop it from violating rights other than the listed ones? Since we can't list all the rights, the Federalists argued that it's better to list none at all.
The separation of powers into three independent branches protected the rights of the people. Each branch represents a different aspect of the people, and because all three branches are equal, no one group can assume control over another.
Overall, the Federalists were more
organized in their efforts.
Ratified June 21, 1788