Anti-Federalists: Constitution Ratification Resistance

The Anti-Federalists were a group who opposed the ratification of the US Constitution. They published essays under pseudonyms such as Brutus, Cato, and the Federal Farmer, expressing their concerns about creating a strong central government and the lack of a Bill of Rights. They argued that the Constitution did not guarantee the protection of individual liberties, and some demanded prior amendments before they would accept the new government.

Explore related products

What the Anti-Federalists Were For: The Political Thought of the Opponents of the Constitution

$18.65 $23

Chen Jiongming and the Federalist Movement: Regional Leadership and Nation Building in Early Republican China (Volume 86) (Michigan Monographs In Chinese Studies)

$60

Revolutionary Brotherhood: Freemasonry and the Transformation of the American Social Order, 1730-1840 (Published by the Omohundro Institute of Early American ... and the University of North Carolina Press)

$16.19 $29.99

Conspiracy Theories in American History: An Encyclopedia [2 volumes]

$201

Allegiance to Liberty: The Changing Face of Patriots, Militias, and Political Violence in America

$53 $58.5

For the People: American Populist Movements from the Revolution to the 1850s

$25.99 $24.95

The Anti-Federalists

The two sides eventually struck a compromise when Massachusetts agreed to ratify the Constitution if the Federalists would agree to add a Bill of Rights.

The Federalists

During the debate in Massachusetts, the Federalists were forced to promise to consider amendments protecting the liberties of the people after the Constitution was ratified. This compromise allowed Massachusetts to become the sixth state to approve the Constitution by a narrow vote of 187 to 168.

The Federal Farmer

The Anti-Federalists were a group that did not want to ratify the Constitution. They produced a body of writings, including essays published under pseudonyms such as 'Brutus', 'Cato' and 'The Federal Farmer'. These writings expressed concerns about creating a strong central government and the lack of a Bill of Rights.

Explore related products

Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788

$13.2 $24

Federalists and Antifederalists: The Debate Over the Ratification of the Constitution (Constitutional Heritage Series)

$35.48 $50

Mapping the Constitution: The Cartographic History of the Ratification of the Constitution

$25.07 $40

The Debate on the Constitution : Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles, and Letters During the Struggle over Ratification : Part One, September 1787-February 1788 (Library of America)

$32.82 $42.5

Original Intentions: On the Making and Ratification of the United States Constitution

$32.88

Slavery's Constitution: From Revolution to Ratification

$17.1 $19.99

No Bill of Rights

The Anti-Federalists were the group that did not want to ratify the Constitution. They produced a body of writings, including essays published under pseudonyms such as “Brutus”, “Cato”, and the “Federal Farmer”, which argued against the ratification of the Constitution. They expressed their concerns about creating a strong central government and the lack of a Bill of Rights.

The Anti-Federalists believed that the Constitution did not guarantee protection of individual liberties. They pointed out that state governments had given jury trials to residents charged with violating the law and allowed their residents to possess weapons for their protection. Some had also practiced religious tolerance. However, the Constitution did not contain reassurances that the federal government would do the same. This led many of the Constitution’s opponents to call for a bill of rights and refuse to ratify the document without one.

The Anti-Federalists' writings were less extensive than The Federalist Papers, which were written by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison. The Federalist Papers urged support for the ratification of the Constitution. Despite their differences, a compromise was eventually struck between the two sides of the debate. Massachusetts agreed to ratify the Constitution if the Federalists would agree to add a Bill of Rights.

The debate over the ratification of the Constitution was a significant event in American history. It highlighted the concerns of the Anti-Federalists about the protection of individual liberties and the role of the federal government. The compromise that was reached, which included the addition of a Bill of Rights, helped to address these concerns and paved the way for the ratification of the Constitution.

Individual liberties

The Anti-Federalists were the group that did not want to ratify the Constitution. They published a series of essays under pseudonyms such as “Brutus”, “Cato”, and the “Federal Farmer”, expressing their concerns about creating a strong central government and the lack of a Bill of Rights.

The Anti-Federalists were concerned about the protection of individual liberties. State governments had given jury trials to residents charged with violating the law and allowed their residents to possess weapons for their protection. Some had also practiced religious tolerance. However, the Constitution did not contain reassurances that the federal government would do the same. Although it provided for habeas corpus and prohibited both a religious test for holding office and granting noble titles, some citizens feared the loss of their traditional rights and the violation of their liberties. This led many of the Constitution’s opponents to call for a bill of rights and refuse to ratify the document without one.

During the debate in Massachusetts, opposition forced the Federalists to promise to consider amendments protecting the liberties of the people after the Constitution was ratified as written. A compromise was struck between the two sides of the debate when Massachusetts agreed to ratify the Constitution if the Federalists would agree to add a Bill of Rights.

Frequently asked questions