Anti-Federalists: Why They Opposed The 1788 Constitution

The Anti-Federalists were a political movement that opposed the ratification of the 1787 Constitution, which went into effect in 1789. They were chiefly concerned with the concentration of power in the federal government, arguing that it would threaten individual liberties and state and local governments. Led by Patrick Henry of Virginia, they also feared that the position of president might evolve into a monarchy. The Anti-Federalists' opposition was an important factor in the adoption of the First Amendment and the other nine amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights.

Explore related products

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

$8.32 $8.95

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

$33

The Anti-Federalist Papers

$0.99 $15.99

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

$18.65 $23

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

$10.95

Anti-Federalists were concerned that the new national government would be too powerful and threaten individual liberties

Anti-Federalists also worried that the position of president might evolve into a monarchy. They felt that the Constitution gave too much power to the federal government, while taking too much power away from state and local governments. The previous constitution, the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, gave state governments more authority.

Anti-Federalists' opposition to the ratification of the Constitution was a powerful force in the origin of the Bill of Rights, which was designed to protect Americans' civil liberties. Their influence helped lead to the passage of the First Amendment and the other nine amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights.

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

The Anti-Federalists opposed the ratification of the 1787 U.S. Constitution because they feared that the new national government would be too powerful and thus threaten individual liberties. They believed that the federal government would be too far removed to represent the average citizen. They felt that the federal government would take too much power away from state and local governments, and that the nation was too large for the national government to respond to the concerns of people on a state and local basis.

Anti-Federalists were also worried that the original text of the Constitution did not contain a bill of rights. They were concerned that the position of president, then a novelty, might evolve into a monarchy. They wanted to protect Americans' civil liberties.

The Anti-Federalists 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. They also held meetings and marches to gain support, which sometimes became violent.

They were worried that the position of president might evolve into a monarchy

The Anti-Federalists opposed the ratification of the 1787/1788 U.S. Constitution because they were concerned that the position of president might evolve into a monarchy. The Anti-Federalists were chiefly concerned with too much power being invested in the national government at the expense of states. They argued that the Constitution gave too much power to the federal government, while taking too much power away from state and local governments. Many felt that the federal government would be too far removed to represent the average citizen. They were also worried that the original text of the Constitution did not contain a bill of rights.

Led by Patrick Henry of Virginia, Anti-Federalists worried that the position of president, then a novelty, might evolve into a monarchy. The previous constitution, called the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, gave state governments more authority. Anti-Federalists mounted an effective opposition in essays and debates. Some 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.

Explore related products

The Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist Dispute: The Original Arguments For Each

$0.99 $25.13

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

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

$32.88

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

They wanted to protect the liberties of the people with a bill of rights

The Anti-Federalists opposed the ratification of the 1787/1788 US Constitution because they feared that the new national government would be too powerful and thus threaten individual liberties. They were chiefly concerned with too much power being invested in the federal government at the expense of states and local governments. They also worried that the position of president might evolve into a monarchy.

Anti-Federalists wanted to protect the liberties of the people with a bill of rights. They believed that the federal government would be too far removed to represent the average citizen, and that the nation was too large for the national government to respond to the concerns of people on a state and local basis. They felt that the original text of the Constitution did not contain a bill of rights, and their opposition was an important factor leading to the adoption of the First Amendment and the other nine amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights.

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. Anti-Federalists held meetings and marches to gain support for their cause, which sometimes became violent.

They wanted to maintain the power of state governments

The Anti-Federalists opposed the ratification of the 1787 US Constitution because they wanted to maintain the power of state governments. They were chiefly concerned with too much power being invested in the national government at the expense of states. They argued that the Constitution gave too much power to the federal government, while taking too much power away from state and local governments. They felt that the federal government would be too far removed to represent the average citizen. The Anti-Federalists were also worried that the original text of the Constitution did not contain a bill of rights.

The Anti-Federalists were mounting an effective opposition in essays and debates. Some 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 Anti-Federalists' opposition to ratifying the Constitution was a powerful force in the origin of the Bill of Rights to protect Americans' civil liberties. Their influence helped lead to the passage of the Bill of Rights. The previous constitution, called the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, gave state governments more authority.

Frequently asked questions