Differences Between The Articles Of Confederation And The Anti-Federalists

After the Revolutionary War, the 13 colonies found themselves in a bind. With a weak national government and no way to impose taxes under the Articles of Confederation, the burden of war debt seemed insurmountable. For the four years between the end of the war and the ratification of the Constitution in 1788, debate raged on between the Anti-Federalists, who supported the Articles of Confederation, and the Federalists, who desired to create a stronger federal government under the Constitution. Many subjects were hotly debated between the two groups, but two of the most important issues debated were the rights of the national and state governments and the Bill of Rights. While compromise on these issues eventually led to the ratification of

In Brutus #1, it was argued that liberty could only be safe in small state and local governments, and the larger government became, the less leaders would be like and represent the common man ("Anti-Federalist Papers: Brutus #1," 2016). With a strong central government, it was feared that eventually the state's powers would be vastly reduced and the federal government would become tyrannical (Cornell, 2012). The Anti-Federalist papers were written mostly by New York judge Robert Yates. In regards to state's rights, the Anti-Federalists were particularly concerned with both the Necessary and Proper Clause and the Supremacy Clause. The Necessary and Proper Clause, also called the elastic clause, gives Congress the ability to add and adjust laws if they are necessary in a given situation. The Supremacy Clause mandates that federal law trumps conflicting state and local law; this clause worried the Anti-Federalists because they fear the federal government would use it to ban slavery. In Brutus #1, it is

They believed it was essential that individual rights were explicitly stated so that citizens were informed and could defend their own liberty (Cornell, 2012). The Federalists initially believed that a Bill of Rights was not necessary, as the states retained any rights and powers not explicitly granted to the federal government. Seeking to get the Constitution ratified, the Federalists agreed to write a Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights Institute, a non-profit foundation that aims to educate students, explains: The Bill of Rights is a list of limits on government power. For example, what the Founders saw as the natural right of individuals to speak and worship freely was protected by the First Amendment’s prohibitions on Congress from making laws establishing a religion or abridging freedom of speech. For another example, the natural right to be free from unreasonable government intrusion in one’s home was safeguarded by the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirements. ("Bill of Rights,"