Federalists And Anti-Federalists: The Constitution's Ratification Debate

The ratification of the Constitution was hotly contested between two groups: the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The Federalists defended the Constitution's strengthened national government, with its greater congressional powers, more powerful executive, and independent judiciary. The Anti-Federalists, meanwhile, mounted an effective opposition in essays and debates, demanding prior amendments to be sent to a second convention before they would accept the new government.

Explore related products

The Anti-Federalist Papers and the Constitutional Convention Debates (Signet Classics)

$8.32 $8.95

The Federalist & The Anti-Federalist Papers: Complete Collection: Including the U.S. Constitution, Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, Important Documents by the Founding Fathers & more

$0.99 $20.4

The Anti-Federalist Papers

$0.99 $15.99

The Debate on the Constitution: Federalist and Anti-Federalist Speeches, Articles, and Letters During the Struggle over Ratification 1787-1788 ( Complete )

$15

The Debate on the Constitution: Federalist and Anti-Federalist Speeches, Articles, and Letters During the Struggle over Ratification 1787-1788: A Library of America Boxed Set

$79.05 $85

An Anti-Federalist Constitution: The Development of Dissent in the Ratification Debates (American Political Thought)

$27.3 $42.99

Federalists vs Anti-Federalists

The Federalists and Anti-Federalists were the two groups that debated over the ratification of the Constitution. The Federalists defended the Constitution's strengthened national government, with its greater congressional powers, more powerful executive, and independent judiciary. They supported ratification of the Constitution.

The Anti-Federalists, on the other hand, opposed ratification. They dominated the New York Convention three to one and mounted an effective opposition in essays and debates. Some Anti-Federalists demanded prior amendments to be sent to a second convention before they would accept the new government. 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.

The debate over ratification played out in several states, including Massachusetts, Virginia, and New York. In Virginia, the Federalists won the vote for ratification 89 to 79. In New York, the Anti-Federalists initially dominated, but the Federalists eventually prevailed by a narrow vote of 30 to 27. New York conditionally ratified the Constitution, calling for another convention to propose a bill of rights.

The ratification of the Constitution was a contentious issue, with passionate arguments made on both sides. The Federalists and Anti-Federalists presented their positions through essays, debates, and conventions, ultimately shaping the fundamental law of the land for the states that adopted it.

The Virginia Convention

The Federalists, who supported ratification, argued for a strengthened national government with greater congressional powers, a more powerful executive, and an independent judiciary. They believed that these changes were necessary to create a more unified and effective nation. Meanwhile, the Anti-Federalists, who opposed ratification, demanded prior amendments to be sent to a second convention before they would accept the new government. They wanted to ensure that the liberties of the people were protected and that the national government did not become too powerful.

The New York Convention

The Federalists' strategy worked, and New Yorkers soon learned that the Constitution had officially become the fundamental law of the land for the states adopting it. The question then became whether New York would join the new federal union. On July 26, by a narrow vote of 30 to 27, New York conditionally ratified the Constitution, with a call for another convention to propose a bill of rights.

Explore related products

The Anti-Federalist Papers and the Constitutional Convention Debates[ANTI-FEDERALIST PAPERS & THE C][Mass Market Paperback]

$21.97 $44.95

The Federalist & The Anti-Federalist Papers: Complete Collection: Including the U.S. Constitution, Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, Important Documents by the Founding Fathers & more

$0.99

The Federalist Papers Hamilton Study Edition

$12.95 $12.95

The Anti-Federalist Papers (Dover Thrift Editions: American History)

$10 $15.59

Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist: The Great Debate (Complete Articles & Essays in One Volume): Constitutional Arguments Shaping American Democracy

$1.99

The Federalist Papers (Signet Classics)

$8.12 $8.95

The Massachusetts Debate

The debate over the ratification of the Constitution was between the Federalists, who supported ratification, and the Anti-Federalists, who opposed it. The Federalists defended the Constitution's strengthened national government, with its greater congressional powers, more powerful executive, and independent judiciary. The Anti-Federalists, meanwhile, demanded prior amendments to be sent to a second convention before they would accept the new government.

During the debate in Massachusetts, the Anti-Federalists forced the Federalists to promise to consider amendments protecting the liberties of the people after the Constitution was ratified as written. On February 6, Massachusetts became the sixth state to approve the Constitution by a narrow vote of 187 to 168. This was a significant victory for the Federalists, as Massachusetts was one of the most powerful states in the country at the time.

The debate in Massachusetts was just one part of a larger battle between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists over the ratification of the Constitution. The Federalists were ultimately successful in getting the Constitution ratified, but the Anti-Federalists continued to push for amendments to protect individual liberties. This struggle between the two groups shaped the early years of the United States and helped to define the role of the federal government.

The New Hampshire Convention

New Hampshire had the chance to become “The Keystone of the Federal Arch” if they could ratify before the Virginia convention, whose meeting overlapped, did so first. Only ninety of the 113 delegates attended; two-thirds of the absent delegates came from Anti-Federalist towns. Federalists seized the opportunity and pushed for a quick vote. Anti-Federalists could count heads as well, and they sought to minimise damage by insisting on conditional amendments prior to voting to ratify. Federalists opposed that motion and instead put forward a list of amendments to be recommended to the new Federal Congress after ratification. New Hampshire’s amendments were nearly identical to those of Massachusetts and focused on individual rights.

Acting on this optimism, New Hampshire Federalists called a special session of the legislature for December 1787 to set the dates for election of delegates, then scheduled the ratifying convention for Exeter in mid-February 1788. Anti-Federalists were forced to react but they succeeded—by arguing that the new Constitution endangered popular liberties—in securing elections of many known ratification opponents to the convention.

Frequently asked questions