Backlash And Resistance: Constitution's Controversial Journey

The United States Constitution has been one of the longest-lived and most emulated constitutions in the world. However, the road to its ratification was not without backlash and opposition. The Constitution was drafted during a tumultuous time in American history, with the young country facing a financial crisis, disorder, and disputes over territory, war pensions, taxation, and trade. The Federalists, who believed in a strong central government, faced opposition from the Anti-Federalists, who argued that the Constitution created a powerful central government reminiscent of the one they had overthrown and lacked a bill of rights. The Anti-Federalists were disorganized and led by state-centered men with regional interests and loyalties, but they passionately attacked the Constitution on multiple fronts. The ratification process was a closely contested affair, with only 6 out of 13 states initially reporting a pro-Constitution majority. The Federalists had to work hard to secure the necessary votes for ratification, and the process was marred by rancor, bitterness, and violent riots.

Explore related products

Backlash Presidents: From Transformative to Reactionary Leaders in American History (Princeton Studies in American Politics)

$29.95 $29.95

U.S. Constitution: a QuickStudy Laminated Reference Guide

$6.46

The Tragedy of William Jennings Bryan: Constitutional Law and the Politics of Backlash

$28.99 $45

Controversies in the Common Law: Tracing the Contributions of Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin

$66.35 $70

Democratic Decline in Hungary: Law and Society in an Illiberal Democracy (Comparative Constitutional Change)

$44.83 $58.99

The Annotated U.S. Constitution and Declaration of Independence

$21 $21

Anti-Federalists opposed the Constitution, fearing a powerful central government

The United States Constitution, drafted in 1787, was a remarkable achievement that has provided stability and liberty to the country for most of its history. However, the process of drafting and ratifying the Constitution faced significant backlash, particularly from Anti-Federalists.

Anti-Federalists opposed the Constitution due to their fear of a powerful central government. They had recently overthrown a strong central authority during the Revolutionary War and were wary of creating a similar system. The Anti-Federalists believed that the Constitution concentrated too much power in a central government, undermining state sovereignty and individual liberties. They argued that the Constitution lacked a bill of rights and that it would lead to aristocratic rule, with politicians serving their own class interests.

The Anti-Federalists' concerns were not unfounded. The Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia was tasked with revising the existing Articles of Confederation, which had limited enforcement powers and could not effectively regulate commerce or manage state disputes. The new Constitution created a much stronger central government, with a powerful legislature and executive. This shift towards centralization was a significant concern for Anti-Federalists, who valued state autonomy and feared the concentration of power.

The opposition to the Constitution by Anti-Federalists was widespread, but disorganized and lacking in unified leadership. They attacked the proposed Constitution on multiple fronts, including the lack of a bill of rights, direct taxation, and discrimination against southern states. However, their efforts were largely unsuccessful, and the Federalists, led by James Wilson, dominated the ratification process in states like Pennsylvania.

The ratification of the Constitution by 9 out of 13 states marked a significant shift towards a more powerful central government. The Anti-Federalists' fears of centralized power were not assuaged, and they continued to fight against the concentration of authority in the federal government. Their influence, however, was limited, and the Constitution stood as one of the most successful and long-lasting constitutions in the world.

The Constitution lacked a bill of rights, allowing for civil rights abuses

The United States Constitution has faced various criticisms since its inception in 1787. One of the most serious objections to the proposed plan of union was the absence of a bill of rights, which allowed for civil rights abuses. This was a major concern for the Anti-Federalists, who fought against the Constitution as it created a powerful central government and lacked the protections of a bill of rights.

The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the United States and the oldest and longest-standing written and codified national constitution in force in the world. It superseded the Articles of Confederation, the nation's first constitution, in 1789. The Articles of Confederation gave the Confederation Congress the power to make rules and request funds from the states, but it had no enforcement powers and could not regulate commerce or print money. The states' disputes over territory, war pensions, taxation, and trade threatened to tear the young country apart.

The Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in 1787 addressed the problems of the weak central government that existed under the Articles of Confederation. The United States Constitution that emerged established a federal government with more specific powers, including those related to conducting relations with foreign governments. The Constitution's first three articles embody the doctrine of separation of powers, dividing the federal government into the legislative, executive, and judicial branches.

The lack of a bill of rights in the original Constitution allowed for civil rights abuses and was a major concern for the Anti-Federalists. They believed that the Constitution created a powerful central government that could infringe on individual liberties. The Federalists, on the other hand, supported the Constitution and believed that a strong central government was necessary to face the nation's challenges. The debate over the bill of rights continued even after the Constitution was ratified, with supporters of the Constitution promising to quickly work to add a bill of rights.

The First Federal Congress of the new government fulfilled that promise and added a bill of rights, making the Constitution more perfect. This bill of rights addressed concerns over civil rights abuses and helped to protect individual liberties. The addition of the bill of rights was a significant step in the evolution of the Constitution and the protection of civil rights in the United States.

The founding document did not give citizens much say in the election of officials

The founding document of the US Constitution was drafted in 1787, and it was an extraordinary achievement. The delegates to the Constitutional Convention created a model of government that relied on a series of checks and balances by dividing federal authority between the Legislative, Judicial, and Executive branches. However, the founding document did not give citizens much say in the election of officials, and this was one of the main points of backlash against the Constitution.

The Anti-Federalists, who opposed the Constitution, argued that it created a powerful central government that reminded them of the one they had just overthrown in the Revolutionary War. They also criticised the lack of a bill of rights and the discrimination against southern states in navigation legislation, direct taxation, and the loss of state sovereignty. The Anti-Federalists were disorganized and led by state-centered men with regional interests and loyalties. They attacked the Constitution on multiple fronts, but ultimately, the Federalists prevailed, and the Constitution was ratified by 9 of the 13 states.

The Federalists, led by James Wilson, believed that a strong central government was necessary to face the nation's challenges. They argued that the Articles of Confederation, which was America's first constitution, gave the Confederation Congress the power to make rules and request funds from the states, but it had no enforcement powers and could not regulate commerce or print money. The Federalists wanted a powerful central government to provide order and stability, and they successfully convinced enough states to ratify the Constitution, despite the opposition from the Anti-Federalists.

The delegates to the Constitutional Convention were wary of centralized power and loyal to their states, so they created a compromise that resulted in a powerful central government with a division of powers. They bypassed the state legislatures and called for special ratifying conventions in each state, knowing that members of the state legislatures would be reluctant to give up power to a national government. This compromise helped to secure the ratification of the Constitution and the formation of a new government.

The Constitution has been successful in striking a balance between maintaining public order and security and protecting personal liberty. It has provided remarkable stability to popular democracy and created a delicate balance between governmental power and personal liberty among the citizens. However, it is important to note that the Constitution has undergone amendments and interpretations over time to address some of the concerns raised by the Anti-Federalists and to adapt to the changing needs of the nation.

Explore related products

Constitutional Law as Fiction: Narrative in the Rhetoric of Authority

$24.65 $40.95

The Constitution of the United States of America: The Declaration of Independence, The Bill of Rights

$9.99 $9.99

How to Read the Constitution--and Why (Legal Expert Series)

$14.36 $19.99

Interpreting the Bible & the Constitution (John W. Kluge Center Books)

$34.57 $73

The State as a Work of Art: The Cultural Origins of the Constitution

$37

The United States Constitution: Two Hundred Years of Anti-Federalist, Abolitionist, Feminist, Muckraking, Progressive, and Especially Socialist Criticism

$21.78 $39

The Constitution was criticised for its limited provisions for a limited government

The Constitution of the United States has been criticised for its limited provisions for a limited government. The Anti-Federalists, for instance, opposed the Constitution because it created a powerful central government that reminded them of the one they had just overthrown, and it lacked a bill of rights. They attacked the Federalists on several fronts: the lack of a bill of rights, discrimination against southern states in navigation legislation, direct taxation, and the loss of state sovereignty. Many charged that the Constitution represented the work of aristocratic politicians bent on protecting their class interests.

The Federalists, on the other hand, believed that a strong central government was necessary to face the nation's challenges. Led by James Wilson, they dominated in the Pennsylvania convention, carrying the vote on December 12 by 46 to 23. James Wilson, a Scotsman, praised the new government as the best "which has ever been offered to the world". The vote for ratification in Pennsylvania did not end the rancour and bitterness. Franklin, for example, declared that scurrilous articles in the press were giving the impression that Pennsylvania was "peopled by a set of the most unprincipled, wicked, rascally and quarrelsome scoundrels upon the face of the globe."

The Constitution was also criticised for not giving citizens much say in the election of their officials. The original document, for example, did not include the right to free speech and protection from unreasonable search and seizure. Over time, the Constitution has been amended and interpreted to include these individual rights, but substantial barriers—such as gerrymandering, voter registration, and voter ID laws—still restrain the power of the vote.

The Constitution has also been criticised for its limited enforcement powers, its inability to regulate commerce, and its inability to print money. The disputes over territory, war pensions, taxation, and trade threatened to tear the young country apart. The delegates to the Constitutional Convention were tasked with revising the existing government, but they created a powerful central government instead. Representing wildly different interests and views, they crafted compromises. The founders set the terms for ratifying the Constitution, bypassing the state legislatures and calling for special ratifying conventions in each state.

The Federalists were accused of being aristocratic, protecting their class interests

The United States Constitution has faced criticism and backlash since its inception in 1787. One of the main points of contention was the Federalists' alleged aristocratic tendencies and their purported protection of class interests. The Federalists, who advocated for a robust central government, clashed with the Anti-Federalists, who saw the new Constitution as reminiscent of the monarchy they had recently overthrown.

The Anti-Federalists, including James Madison, accused the Federalists of being aristocratic and safeguarding their class interests. In the Massachusetts convention, a delegate denounced the Federalists as "these lawyers, and men of learning and moneyed men," implying that they exploited the less educated to further their agenda. Madison described the Anti-Federalists in Massachusetts as disorganized but passionate in their opposition to the Federalists on issues such as the lack of a bill of rights, direct taxation, and the loss of state sovereignty.

The Federalists, on the other hand, were led by James Wilson in Pennsylvania, where they carried the vote for ratification. They believed that a strong central government was necessary to address the nation's challenges. However, the ratification process was contentious, with Anti-Federalist rioters in Carlisle hanging Wilson and the chief justice of Pennsylvania, Thomas McKean, in effigy.

The Federalists' aristocratic reputation may have stemmed from their support for a powerful central government, which some saw as a threat to state sovereignty and individual liberties. The Constitution's initial lack of clarity regarding voting rights allowed most states to restrict voting to white male property owners. This exclusionary practice, along with the absence of a bill of rights, contributed to the perception that the Federalists were protecting their class interests at the expense of the common people. The Federalists' aristocratic reputation and the accusations of class bias highlighted the deep divisions within the young nation and the ongoing struggle to balance state and federal powers while safeguarding individual liberties.

Frequently asked questions