ipl-logo

Why Did The Federalists Agree To Interpret The Constitution

287 Words2 Pages

It 's never good for a new country to fight over its very foundation. In the USA’s case the foundation was the constitution, and the disagreement was over how to interpret the document. The amendments and code of conduct are listed in the constitution so this dispute was for the better of the country. The Federalists believed in a loose interpretation of the constitution. They believed that the constitution was a living document and could be changed as the people in society changed. The Federalists believed that if needed the document should have been changeable if it was for the better of the country and the people. An example of this was when the government changed what was considered cruel and unusual punishment for the sake of the people.The

Show More
Related

  • Federalist Papers Purpose To Ratify The Constitution

    161 Words  | 1 Pages

    The Federalist Papers were a collection of essays in support of the ratification of the Constitution. The writers of the papers tried to stay anonymous, but people soon figured that writers were James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay. The authors didn’t want to put their names on their works, because they wanted to keep their identity hidden, so that people would take their argument form an objective point of view rather than a subjective view due to their personalities. The Federalist Papers worked at their main objective to ratify the Constitution. It was important that all states ratified the Constitution, especially Virginia and New York.

    Read More

  • Federalists Vs Anti-Federalists

    674 Words  | 3 Pages

    Federalists The Federalists had a better belief on improving the government. They believed in ratification. They knew if you separated the powers of government under three branches, it would protect the rights of people. No one branch has more authority than the other.

    Read More

  • Explain What Compromises Were Made At The Constitutional Convention

    705 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Federalists of the convention were in favor of the ratification of the Constitution. They believed that the national government must be strong in order to function and to control uncooperative states, which could protect the rights of the people. They also believed that the Constitution and state government protected individual freedoms. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists opposed a strong central government, particularly a standing army. They believed it threatened state power along with the rights of the common people.

    Read More

  • Bill Of Rights: Ratification Of The Constitution In 1787

    157 Words  | 1 Pages

    After the Declaration of Independence in 1787, the Federal Government turned to the creation of the Constitution in which delegates from 13 states convened to make compromises on their beliefs for the betterment of a nation. Although the Bill of Rights was initially not a part of the Constitution, the Federalists thought that it was crucial to ensure ratification of the Constitution. This ratification was one of the main reasons why the Bill of Rights needed to be added. Federalists feared a strong, central government, and created a Bill of Rights in order to prevent government abuse. Others believed that a dominating Government could prohibit rights in the future, which would not necessarily be expressed in the Bill of Rights.

    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

  • 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

  • Compare Federalists And Anti Federalists

    214 Words  | 1 Pages

    “Federalists vs Anti-Federalists” The title of the article is “The Antifederalists were right” it was written on Sept. 27, 2006 by Gary Galles. The article was about the reasons why antifederalists were right. The Federalists wanted a strong central government.

    Read More

  • Anti Federalism In Civil War

    834 Words  | 4 Pages

    They didn’t expect people to just “accept the merit of the constitution on faith alone.” The federalists knew they had to prove themselves, so they claimed that the constitution was written by ordinary people like the ones criticizing it. They said that there is no plan that is faultless. The articles of confederation were very unstable, so they wanted to make the constitution to where the government was more stable, but it wouldn’t threaten the people’s liberties. They came to a conclusion that to avoid too much power, they would let people be

    Read More

  • Articles Of Confederation Dbq Essay

    585 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Federalist main argument was stated based off the opinion that the government would never have complete power over the citizens, but the citizens would also have a little more power and a say in the things that involve them. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists believed in limited powers specifically stated, they wanted strong state governments, and wanted a Bill of Rights added to the Constitution to protect the people from the government (Document 4). This was their point of view due to the fact that they believed that the individual states know and can act more based on their people that on federal government can. They focused their argument on the rights of the citizens. For the Federalists and Anti-Federalists to agree on a new government, they created a compromise that combined each of their ideas.

    Read More

  • Ratification Of The Constitution Essay

    494 Words  | 2 Pages

    They felt the Constitution would create a system of federalism, a system in which the national government holds significant power, but the smaller political subdivisions also hold significant power. They felt the country needed a strong central government so that it didn’t fall apart. The Ant-Federalists were on the opposing side, they felt the Constitution granted the government too much power. They also felt there wasn’t enough protection of their right with an absent Bill of Rights. Another concern of the Anti-Federalists mainly came from the lower classes, from their standpoint they thought the wealthy class would be in main control and gain the most benefits from the ratification of this document.

    Read More

  • Differences And Similarities Between Anti-Federalists And Anti-Federalists

    622 Words  | 3 Pages

    Federalists and Anti-Federalists had opposing views in the Constitution because of their differences; but they also had many similarities that ended up leading to the ratification of the Constitution. Anti-Federalists and Federalist had many similarities. Both were supportive of this new country and knew that they needed a government. They both wanted the congress to have power to create war and to create treaties.

    Read More

  • Dbq Essay Against Tyranny

    669 Words  | 3 Pages

    However this idea was eventually scrapped and they wrote a whole new constitution. This constitution would protect America from tyranny, so they could keep a civilized and united country. The Constitution that was made helped defend America from almost all types of tyranny and is still helping us hundreds of years later. One way the Constitution prevented tyranny is by supporting Federalism.

    Read More

  • Federalist Vs Democratic-Republican Dbq Essay

    642 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Federalists and Democratic-Republicans disagreed on various aspects of politics. Federalists believed in a looser interpretation of the constitution. This meant that they did not follow the constitution for what it strictly said, but rather they interpreted the constitution with the belief that there were implications within the constitution. For example, Hamilton believed that the construction of the bank was constitutional, for it was implied within the constitution (Document

    Read More

  • Similarities Between The Constitution And The Federalists

    663 Words  | 3 Pages

    Federalists were supporters of a strong central government that included certain measures to limit the power of the masses, such as the electoral college. Since their ideas so harshly contrasted with those expressed in the Articles of Confederation, they decided to draft an entirely new Constitution that would satisfy their ideas and goals for government. However, even though they wanted to limit the extent to which the government was truly democratic, they still needed the support of

    Read More

  • Robert Yates Anti Federalist 17 Summary

    445 Words  | 2 Pages

    The author of anti-federalist 17# was Robert Yates (not the serial killer), at the time he was a politician and judge also the oldest of his family. he lived in the state of New York and tried to run for governor. The document yates wrote was just about states that the anti-federalists did not desire a constitution as a result of they felt that it 'd offer the central government an excessive amount of power which it 'd remove all power from the states. "to raise and support armies at pleasure, in addition in peace as in war, and their management over the militia, tend not solely to a consolidation of the govt. , however the destruction of liberty..." a stronger central government would higher shield everybody and is additional for the good

    Read More

More about Why Did The Federalists Agree To Interpret The Constitution

Open Document