ipl-logo

Individual Rights Dbq

204 Words1 Page

In 1787 delegates from thirteen states drafted the Constitution which set up a form of self-government with a system of checks and balances. However, the document did not include individual rights which proved to be a hindrance to its ratification. The Constitution stated what government could do, but it did not provide provisions for what government could not do. There was a division among the people as to whether or not individual rights should be included in the Constitution. The Anti-Federalist did not want a strong centralized government. Others wanted the guarantee of a written document that protected the freedoms they had fought so hard to earn. The Bill of Rights was designed to protect the right citizens believed belonged to them.

Show More
Related

  • Summary Of The Supreme Court Case Of Barron V. Baltimore

    1009 Words  | 5 Pages

    Since the creating of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the federal government has grown in its influence over states by several Supreme Court decisions. The Constitution was established to create a limited role of the federal government over the states. The Bill of Rights was included in the Constitution to protect individual rights from an overreaching federal government. It was designed to be a malleable document that has been amended twenty-seven times. At the time of its inception, the Constitution was designed for minimal interference by the federal government for private citizens.

    Read More

  • Explain How The Constitution Guarded Against Tyranny Dbq Essay

    576 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Constitution guarded against Tyranny by creating Federalism, so the states didn't control the same power. They created three branches of government Legislative, Judicial, and Executive. The United States Constitution was constructed on September 17th, 1787. The constitution was written in Philadelphia. The purpose of the constitution was to limit the power of the government.

    Read More

  • Essay On How Did The Constitution Guard Against Tyranny

    465 Words  | 2 Pages

    The constitution was written on May 25, 1787, but there was one problem, the writers of the constitution had to find a way to guard against tyranny. some of their solutions were, Federalism, Separation of powers, Checks and balances, and Balancing powers between the largest states and the smaller states(Large VS Small states). These were the ways the constitution guarded against tyranny. The first guard against tyranny in the constitution is federalism. Federalism is the separation of powers between the Central Government, and the State Government.

    Read More

  • Ratification Of The Us Constitution Dbq Essay

    827 Words  | 4 Pages

    Hence Federalists came up with the Bill of Rights as a way to get the Constitution ratified and for people to really see a needed change. The Bill Of Rights which lists specific prohibitions on governmental power, lead the Anti-Federalists to be less fearful of the new Constitution . This guaranteed that the people would still remain to have rights, but the strong central government that the country needed would have to be approved. The 1804 Map of the nation shows that even after the ratification of the United States Constitution there still continued to be “commotion” and dispute in the country.(Document 8) George Washington stated that the people should have a say in the nation and government and everything should not be left to the government to decide.(Document 3) Although George Washington was a Federalist many believed he showed a point of view that seemed to be Anti-Federalists. Many believed that The Bill of Rights needed to be changed and modified and a new document’s time to come into place.

    Read More

  • Anti-Federalists Give Too Much Power To The Government

    160 Words  | 1 Pages

    The Anti-Federalists that opposed the constitution believed that the constitution would give too much power to the government. The Anti-Federalists argued that a powerful government would become tyrannical like the British monarchy that they worked so hard to escape from. This led them to create The Bill of Rights. Today’s government has similar problems. Nowadays some politicians believe that The Bill of Rights is a living document that can be changed or manipulated to “better fit” the era that we live in.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Federalist And Anti Federalists

    204 Words  | 1 Pages

    Who to divide government powers, individual rights, and if the government or the state got more powers. The Federalist believe the constitution was necessary to protect the safety and independence of the people. They wanted to give more power to the national government and take away power from the state, they also wanted to divide

    Read More

  • Differences Between The Anti-Federalist And Anti Federalists

    842 Words  | 4 Pages

    The Antifedera records stressed that a solid national government would manhandle their rights similarly that the British government had. To relieve their feelings of dread, the Federalists consented to make the Bill of Rights. These alterations to the Constitution explained what rights the general population had that the national government couldn't meddle with. For instance, it said that the national governmer couldn't encroach on individuals' rights to the right to speak freely or religion. The Bill of Rights likewise said that any rights not given to Congress or taken from the states had a place with the states.

    Read More

  • Federalism Dbq Essay

    834 Words  | 4 Pages

    One of the most significant pieces of the constitution is the Bill of Rights, or the first ten amendments. These describe the everyday basic rights of the people in which the federal government can not intervene. By putting these in place the creators of the constitution ensured that the people would always have their rights and there was no chance of the government taking them away, just as had happened with England. Federalism is not the only example of separation of

    Read More

  • The Argument Against The Anti-Federalists

    99 Words  | 1 Pages

    The Federalists wanted a strong central government. The Anti- Federalists claims Constitution gives the central government too much power and, and they worried about the new constitution will not give them any rights. That the new system threatened freedom; Also, threatened the sovereignty of the states and personal liberties; failed to protect individual rights. Besides, some of famous peoples such as " Patrick Henry" and artists have came out against the Constitution. Although the anti-Federalists were unsuccessful in stopping the passage of the Constitution, their efforts have been responsible for the creation and implementation of the Bill of

    Read More

  • How To Treat The Constitution Revolutionary

    989 Words  | 4 Pages

    As the result, the nation split into two groups: federalists, the supporters of the constitution and the antifederalist, the people who against the constitution. The antifederalists argued that “the Constitution lacked a religious test for officeholding and the Constitution failed to guarantee a right to counsel and a right not to incriminate oneself in criminal trials, or to prohibit cruel and unusual punishments,” In response, the Congress proposed the Bill of Rights, consisted of Ten Amendments to guarantees that every citizen would have such rights as “ the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” It is also guarantees “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” This new proposal gained a number of states agree to sign the constitution. The Bill of Rights saved nation from going to another bloody civil war.

    Read More

  • Bill Of Rights Dbq

    429 Words  | 2 Pages

    When our founding fathers first created the Constitution it was found unworkable and had to have some changes before the ratification. In that process people began to have some differences such as the Federalist saw that the enhanced Constitution alone would protect all basic human rights. While Antifederalist saw that we needed an extra addition to the document that would genuinely give the basic rights, liberties, and limit the government from denouncing these rights and liberties from the people. The Bill of Rights was a necessary addition that has and will continue to protect the people from injustice in the government with the help of the Supreme Court.

    Read More

  • Explain Why There Is No Need For The Bill Of Rights To Be Written By The Federalists

    419 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Federalists believe that there is no need for a Bill of Rights to be written in the Constitution. Unalienable rights, Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, and all rights and responsibilities were already spelled out in detail in the Constitution. By creating a Bill of Rights, it would put too much power in the hands of the states; which would just create another confederacy type of government with little power to act. If each state had its own government, they would be very weak and they would probably be eliminated within a year.

    Read More

  • Individual Rights Dbq

    318 Words  | 2 Pages

    Government holds our rights like we are babies they use us and us them against us. Thats the question what are our rights as u.s citizens and what government protects them. I’d say we have no rights because in document D it says “Man is born free,and everywhere he is in chains.” ( Rousseau doc D.) Rousseau in document D explains in the sentence is that when man is born they think they are “Free” when really they are not and they are locked in chains working for the government.

    Read More

  • Anti Federalist Arguments

    151 Words  | 1 Pages

    Finally, the New Constitution needed to be ratified but had difficulties being passed. The Federalist, newspapers, were in support of ratification. These areas expressed the importance of the new Constitution. Antifederalist, on the other hand, believed that the Constitution would give too power to the central government while states would have little to none. In the end, anti-federals lost and federalist, those in favor of the new Constitution, added a bill of rights to satisfy anti-federalist.

    Read More

  • Robert Yates Anti Federalist 17 Summary

    445 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Anti- Federalists claimed the Constitution gave the central government an excessive amount of power, and while not a Bill of Rights the folks would be in danger of oppression. Both Hamilton and Madison argued that the Constitution did not want a Bill of Rights, that it might produce a "parchment barrier" that restricted the rights of the folks, as critical protective

    Read More

More about Individual Rights Dbq

Open Document