What arguments did the anti-federalists make in opposition to the constitution?

Top 5 Reasons Why Anti-Federalists Opposed the Constitution's Plan for a Stronger National Government

1. A powerful national government would swallow up (destroy) the states.

2. In a large country there would be too many different types of people. They would always be fighting with one another.

3. Large numbers of people could not be well represented in a small national legislature.

4. In a large country the national legislature would be far away from most people and they would not be able to keep their eyes on what the government is doing.

5. A powerful peacetime army would be needed to control the people in a large country.

Top 5 Reasons Why Anti-Federalists Opposed the Constitutional Plan for the House of Representatives

1. The number of votes each state got in the House was unequal (based on population).

2. The large states would get so many votes that they would control all of the laws passed.

3. The formula for determining how many votes each state got (1 representative for every 30,000 people) would make it impossible for the people's interests to be well represented.

4. Representatives would be elected for 2 year terms. Two years was too long to wait to have the chance to remove ineffective or corrupt lawmakers.

5. The Constitution did not give the House any power over the making of treaties.

Top 7 Reasons Why Anti-Federalists Opposed the Constitution's Plan for the United States Senate.

1. Large states were against the plan to give every state two votes in the Senate. They argued that states with more people should have more representatives.

2. Senators were to be elected by state legislatures. They should be elected by the people.

3. Six year terms were too long.

4. There were no limits on the number of terms a Senator could serve.

5. The Senate and the President would be partners in treaty making and appointments. This destroyed plans to separate the powers of government.

6. By letting the Vice-President break ties in the Senate, this gave one state three votes instead of the two that every other state got.

Top 7 Reasons Why Anti-Federalists Opposed the Constitutional Plan for the Executive Branch

1. A single president would be just like having a monarchy (i.e. king/queen).

2. The president would be elected by an electoral college. He should be elected by the people.

3. Four years was too long to wait.

4. There were no limits on the number of terms a president could serve.

5. The Constitution gave the president complete control over the military. This would allow the president to use the army to enforce bad laws and keep himself in power.

6. The Constitution gave the president too much power over lawmaking by giving him the veto power.

7. The Constitution gave the president the dangerous power to pardon. He could involve himself in corruption with others and then pardon them.

Top 4 Reasons Why Anti-Federalists Opposed the Constitution's Plan for the judiciary.

1. The Constitution threatened the jury system. It did not guarantee a trial by jury in civil cases and allowed "matters of fact" as well as matters of law to be argued in the lower federal courts without juries.

2. A person might have to travel thousands of miles to have their case heard in the Supreme Court.

3. As the interpreters of the ambiguous parts of the Constitution, the federal judges could give the national government more power at the expense of the states.

4. The importance of state courts would reduced as people flocked to the federal courts to have their cases heard.

Top 5 Reasons Why Anti-Federalists Opposed the Constitution.

1. There was no list of the people's rights.

2. The national government was given too much power.

3. The country was too big for the people to be represented by one national government.

4. The Constitution was undemocratic (e.g. only one of the 4 parts of the federal government would be elected directly by the people).

During the debates over the ratification of the U.S. Constitution in the late 1780s, supporters and opponents of the Constitution evolved into two opposing political parties. Those who endorsed the Constitution were soon called Federalists; those who opposed it or favored waiting until the document was revised to address their concerns about preserving individual rights were termed Anti-Federalists. The Anti-Federalists only became a party when the Constitution was being voted on by the states and it ended soon after opposition to ratification ceased, but the roots of the party went back for many years.

Many Anti-Federalists preferred a weak central government because they equated a strong government with British tyranny. Others wanted to encourage democracy and feared a strong government that would be dominated by the wealthy. They felt that the states were giving up too much power to the new federal government. Another major objection was the lack of guarantees of individual rights in the Constitution as it then stood. Until the adoption of the Bill of Rights in December 1791, there was no right of trial by jury or freedom of assembly, speech, religion, or the press.

North Carolina was strongly Anti-Federalist. Most citizens were small farmers who, while self-reliant and independent, were also by and large provincial and uneducated. They were concerned with their families, crops, and local matters; they gave little thought to the other states or foreign countries; and they were content with the weak government of the Confederation. The state's Anti-Federalist leaders included Willie Jones, David Caldwell, Lemuel Burkitt, Thomas Person, Samuel Spencer, and Timothy Bloodworth.

While most of the state was Anti-Federalist, Federalist sympathies dominated the Albemarle and Pamlico Sound regions and the port towns of Edenton, New Bern, Halifax, and Wilmington, where navigable rivers encouraged trade and access to the outside world and helped connect these areas with the rest of the states. Somewhat unexpectedly, the Cape Fear River region, home of many wealthy planters and an area also dependent on trade, was strongly Anti-Federalist. Only in Wilmington was there much Federalist support.

The split between Federalists and Anti-Federalists continued even after North Carolina joined the Union. Many citizens distrusted the Federalists, who strengthened the central government and began to persecute political dissenters. At the suggestion of Thomas Jefferson, the Anti-Federalists began calling themselves Republicans. Under this name, they grew in strength until they won the presidential election of 1800. In North Carolina, Republicans dominated state politics, and Federalists declined and practically disappeared after the War of 1812.

Educator Resources:

Grade 8: Federalists v. Anti-Federalists. North Carolina Civic Education Consortium. http://civics.sites.unc.edu/files/2012/04/FederalistsAntifederalists.pdf

---

References:

John C. Cavanagh, Decision at Fayetteville: The North Carolina Ratification Convention and the General Assembly of 1789 (1989).

Cecilia M. Kenyon, ed., The Antifederalists (1966).

Jackson Turner Main, The Antifederalists: Critics of the Constitution, 1781-1788 (1961).

Louise Irby Trenholme, The Ratification of the Federal Constitution in North Carolina (1932).

Additional Resources:

Cherry, Kevin. "Summary of Proceedings and Debates of the Convention of North-Carolina, Convened at Hillsborough, on Monday the 21st Day of July, 1788, for the Purpose of Deliberating and Determining on the Constitution Recommended by the General Convention at Philadelphia, the 17th Day of September, 1787: To Which is Prefixed the Said Constitution. Edenton, N.C.: Hodge & Wills, 1789.

What were the 3 main arguments of the Anti

What arguments did the anti-federalists make against ratifying the Constitution? A argument there were three basic issues, whether the Constitution would maintain the republican government, the national government would have too much power, and the bill of rights was needed in the Constitution.

What did the anti federalist argue for?

The Anti-Federalists argued against the expansion of national power. They favored small localized governments with limited national authority as was exercised under the Articles of Confederation.

What was the main argument of the Anti

The Anti-Federalists argued that the new Constitution would destroy the liberties won in the American Revolution. They believed the new Constitution would create a national government so powerful that it would ignore the rights of the states.