The Anti-Federalists: Constitution's Unfavorable Faction

The United States Constitution faced opposition from a group known as the Anti-Federalists, who did not want it to go into effect. They believed that the Constitution would lead to a loss of individual liberties and an erosion of state sovereignty. The Anti-Federalists were concerned that the Constitution gave too much power to the federal government, creating a king-like office in the presidency, and that it lacked a Bill of Rights to protect certain fundamental liberties such as freedom of speech and trial by jury. The group included small farmers, landowners, shopkeepers, and labourers, and notable figures such as Patrick Henry, Melancton Smith, and Elbridge Gerry.

Explore related products

The Anti-Federalist: Writings by the Opponents of the Constitution

$33

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

$8.32 $8.95

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

$10 $15.59

The Federalist Papers (Dover Thrift Editions: American History)

$7.14 $8

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

$18.65 $23

The Federalist Papers, Extended Edition: An Essential Collection of The Original, Unabridged Text (1787–88) With Detailed Commentary on Each Essay to Guide you Through America's Founding Ideas

$24.95

Anti-Federalists believed the Constitution gave too much power to the federal government

The Anti-Federalists were a group of Americans who opposed the ratification of the 1787 US Constitution. They believed that the Constitution gave too much power to the federal government, threatening individual liberties. The Anti-Federalists included small farmers, landowners, shopkeepers, and labourers. They generally agreed on a few key points:

Firstly, they believed that the Constitution consolidated too much power in the hands of Congress, at the expense of the states. They argued that the liberties of the people were best protected when power resided in state governments rather than a federal one. The Anti-Federalists favoured strong state governments, a weak central government, the direct election of government officials, short term limits for officeholders, and accountability by officeholders to popular majorities. They also sought to strengthen individual liberties.

Secondly, the Anti-Federalists believed that the unitary president resembled a monarch, and this resemblance would produce courts of intrigue in the nation's capital. They were concerned that the office of the president was king-like, and that the federal government would become tyrannous without a Bill of Rights to protect individual liberties. They argued that the vast territory of the 13 states was too extensive for a representative government, and that in a large republic, the government would be impersonal, unrepresentative, dominated by the wealthy, and oppressive of the poor and working classes.

To combat the Federalist campaign, the Anti-Federalists published a series of articles and delivered numerous speeches against the ratification of the Constitution. These writings and speeches are known as the Anti-Federalist Papers. Despite their efforts, they failed to prevent the adoption of the Constitution. However, their opposition played an important role in the origin of the Bill of Rights, which was added to the Constitution to protect Americans' civil liberties. The Bill of Rights includes the right to free speech, the right to a speedy trial, the right to due process under the law, and protections against cruel and unusual punishments.

They wanted a Bill of Rights to protect individual liberties

The Anti-Federalists opposed the 1787 US Constitution, arguing that it lacked a bill of rights to protect individual liberties. They believed that the new national government would be too powerful and threaten individual freedoms. The Anti-Federalists, including small farmers, landowners, shopkeepers, and laborers, wanted power to remain with state and local governments. They argued that a bill of rights was necessary to safeguard individual liberty and curb any "tyranny" of the executive or legislative branches. Thomas Jefferson, for instance, was a strong supporter of supplementing the Constitution with a bill of rights.

The Federalists, on the other hand, argued that a bill of rights was unnecessary and even dangerous. They believed that the government could only exert the powers specified by the Constitution and that any listing of rights could be interpreted as exhaustive, with rights omitted being considered as not retained. James Madison, initially a vocal opponent of the Bill of Rights, also shared this view. He and other Federalists asserted that the state constitutions had delegated to the state all rights and powers not explicitly reserved for the people.

However, when ratification was in danger in Massachusetts, Madison and other Federalists agreed to consider adding amendments. Madison introduced a list of amendments to the Constitution on June 8, 1789, and worked tirelessly to secure its passage. He proposed amendments that emphasized the rights of individuals, which later became known as the Bill of Rights.

The House passed a joint resolution containing 17 amendments based on Madison's proposal, but the Senate changed it to 12 amendments. On October 2, 1789, President Washington sent these 12 amendments to the states for approval. By December 15, 1791, three-fourths of the states had ratified 10 of these amendments, now known as the Bill of Rights. The addition of the Bill of Rights to the Constitution addressed the concerns of the Anti-Federalists and ensured the protection of individual liberties.

They believed the federal government would be too far removed to represent the average citizen

Many Americans were opposed to the ratification of the Constitution when it was first introduced in 1787. Those who opposed it, known as Anti-Federalists, believed that the federal government created by the Constitution would be too powerful and distant from the people it was meant to represent. They argued that the Constitution would result in a centralized government that would be out of touch with the needs and concerns of average citizens.

The Anti-Federalists favoured a weak central government and strong state governments.

Explore related products

The Essential Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers (Hackett Classics)

$11 $11

Documents of Revolution: Common Sense, The Complete Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers, The Articles of Confederation, The Articles of Confederation, The U. S. Constitution, The Bill of Rights

$26.99 $26.99

The Anti-Federalist Papers Publisher: Signet Classics

$11.53 $24.99

The Anti-Federalist Papers

$10.95

The Federalist Papers Made Easier: The Complete and Original Text Subdivided and Annotated for Easier Understanding

$24.95 $24.95

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

They believed the federal government would threaten states' rights

The Anti-Federalists were against the ratification of the US Constitution, drafted in 1787, as they believed it would lead to a loss of individual liberties and an erosion of state sovereignty. They advocated for a more decentralized form of government with greater protections for individual rights and stronger representation for the states. The Anti-Federalists believed that the Constitution, as drafted, would be oppressive and that the federal government would threaten states' rights.

The Anti-Federalists were worried about the absence of a bill of rights in the original text of the Constitution. They wanted guaranteed protection for certain basic liberties, such as freedom of speech, trial by jury, and the right to a speedy trial. They believed that the federal government would be too far removed to represent the average citizen and that it would not serve the interests of small towns and rural areas. They also believed that the Constitution created a presidency so powerful that it would become a monarchy.

To address these concerns, the Federalists promised to add a bill of rights if the Anti-Federalists would support the Constitution. The Bill of Rights, added in 1791, includes 10 constitutional amendments that secure the basic rights and privileges of American citizens. It reserves any power not given to the federal government to the states and the people, and it has become the most important part of the Constitution for most Americans.

The Anti-Federalists' opposition to the ratification of the Constitution was a powerful force in the origin of the Bill of Rights and the protection of Americans' civil liberties. Their concerns about the potential for the federal government to threaten states' rights were not unfounded, as there have been several instances where the federal government has threatened to withhold funding or take actions that upset the traditional balance between the federal and state governments.

They believed the president would become a king

The Anti-Federalists were a late-18th-century political movement that opposed the creation of a stronger US federal government and later opposed the ratification of the 1787 Constitution. The Anti-Federalists believed that the unitary president eerily resembled a monarch and that that resemblance would eventually produce courts of intrigue in the nation’s capital. Led by Patrick Henry of Virginia, Anti-Federalists worried that the position of president, then a novelty, might evolve into a monarchy.

The Anti-Federalists believed that the new Constitution consolidated too much power in the hands of Congress, at the expense of the states. They believed that the liberties of the people were best protected when power resided in state governments, as opposed to a federal one. They believed that without a Bill of Rights, the federal government would become tyrannous. These arguments created a powerful current against adopting the Constitution in each of the states. In state legislatures across the country, opponents of the Constitution railed against the extensive powers it granted the federal government and its detraction from the republican governments of the states.

In Virginia, Patrick Henry, author of the famous "Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death" speech, called the proposed constitution "A revolution as radical as that which separated us from Great Britain." In the Essays of Brutus, an anonymous author worried that without any limitations, the proposed Constitution would make "the state governments… dependent on the will of the general government for their existence." The Anti-Federalists believed that the Constitution, as drafted, would lead to a loss of individual liberties, an erosion of state sovereignty, and the potential for the rise of tyranny. They advocated for a more decentralized form of government with greater protections for individual rights and stronger representation for the states.

The Anti-Federalists included small farmers and landowners, shopkeepers, and laborers. In terms of foreign affairs, they were pro-French. They published a series of articles and delivered numerous speeches against the ratification of the Constitution. These independent writings and speeches have come to be known collectively as The Anti-Federalist Papers. Although Patrick Henry, Melancton Smith, and others eventually came out publicly against the ratification of the Constitution, which they would vigorously debate in the press.

Frequently asked questions