ipl-logo

Anti Federalists Arguments

487 Words2 Pages

During the process of ratifying the constitution, the federalists and anti-federalists had major disagreements on what views and ideas should be presented. Because of all of the disagreements, the two groups were eventually divided and each held their own views on what the constitution should carry. The federalists were a group of led by Alexander Hamilton and were the first political party of the United States. Most of the federalist lived in urban areas.A few other members of the federalist group included: John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and Alexander Hamilton. This group strongly stood for ratifying the constitution unlike the anti-federalists. One main reason this group stood for ratifying the constitution was because they wanted a stronger government that would aid with all of the debt and chaos caused by the American Revolution. When it came down to the anti-federalists, they were totally against anything to do with the ratification of the constitution until it …show more content…

One of the arguments that they proposed was that having a strong government would be remote from the people and the government wouldn't be able to protect the people of their rights. They argued that congress would end up taxing too much and the supreme court would take charge of the state courts. One of their last big arguments was that a large nation could most definitely be best ruled by a confederation. Although most of the ideas the anti-federalists thought were great, the federalists argued differently. The federalists believed in having a strong national government with supreme power over state governments. They also argued that if they were to give too much power to the states, it would no doubt create a government with not enough power to act. They believed this was great movement that would protect the people's rights from the Bill of Rights, government, and the

Open Document