The Constitution's Struggle: Why The Ratification Wasn't Easy

The struggle to ratify the Constitution was a bitter and divisive debate that took place in the United States from 1787 to 1789. The Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton, supported the new Constitution and fought for a strong federal government. On the other hand, the Antifederalists, a diverse group that included small farmers, shopkeepers, and prominent men such as Patrick Henry, George Mason, and Elbridge Gerry, opposed the Constitution, arguing that it took power away from the states and the people. The debate divided Americans and was a chaotic and unpredictable process that lasted for four volatile years, from the revelation of the controversial constitutional design in September 1787 to the divisive adoption of the Bill of Rights in December 1791.

Explore related products

Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788

$13.2 $24

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

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

The Debate on the Constitution : Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles and Letters During the Struggle over Ratification, Part Two: January to August 1788 (Library of America)

$27.9 $42.5

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

$15

Ordeal of the Constitution: The Antifederalists and the Ratification Struggle of 1787-1788

$59.51

The Federalists vs. the Antifederalists

The debate over ratification of the Constitution from 1787 to 1789 was extremely bitter and divided Americans into two factions: the Federalists, who supported the new Constitution, and the Antifederalists, who were against it. The Antifederalists were a diverse group that included small farmers and shopkeepers, as well as prominent men such as Patrick Henry, George Mason, and Elbridge Gerry. Their chief complaint about the Constitution was that it took power away from the states, thereby taking power away from the people. The Federalists, on the other hand, believed in a strong federal government and were led by Alexander Hamilton.

The debates between the two sides raged fiercely, with the Federalists agreeing to add a bill of rights to the Constitution as soon as possible after ratification, which convinced some in the middle to back the new document. The ratification of the Constitution was a chaotic and unpredictable process, with scholars recognising that it was very much in line with the history of the creation of the American Republic. By 1788, enough states had ratified the Constitution so that it went into effect in early 1789. The few holdouts all ratified the document by 1790.

The Constitution's controversial design

The Constitution's design was revealed in September 1787, and the debates over ratification from 1787 to 1789 were extremely bitter. By 1788, enough states had ratified the Constitution for it to go into effect in early 1789. The few holdouts all ratified the document by 1790, and the Bill of Rights was adopted in December 1791.

The Constitution's persistence and validity may seduce many Americans into imagining its passage as fated. The design, some like to believe, was so brilliant, and the framers were such honourable visionaries, that ratification must have been inevitable. However, this view overlooks the rancorous and momentous debates that took place over whether to accept the radical proposed Constitution. Scholars' interpretations of ratification vary, with some seeing it as a fulfilment of the ideals of the American Revolution, while others view it as a reversal of democratizing impulses, even a coup.

Across interpretations, scholars recognize that ratification was chaotic, unpredictable, and nerve-wracking—very much in line with the history of the creation of the American Republic. The framers of the Constitution knew that it would only have real power if all thirteen states ratified it. This created a struggle for ratification, with the Federalists and Antifederalists vying for influence and ultimately leading to the addition of the Bill of Rights to address concerns about states' rights and the balance of power.

The Bill of Rights

The struggle to ratify the Constitution was a bitter and divisive debate that took place between 1787 and 1789. The Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton, supported the new Constitution and fought for a strong federal government. On the other hand, the Antifederalists, a diverse group that included small farmers, shopkeepers, and prominent men such as Patrick Henry, George Mason, and Elbridge Gerry, advocated for states' rights. The Antifederalists' chief complaint was that the Constitution took power away from the states and, therefore, the people. The debates between the two sides were fierce and often rancorous.

To address the concerns of the Antifederalists, the Federalists agreed to add a Bill of Rights to the Constitution as soon as possible after ratification. This concession convinced some in the middle to back the new document. The Bill of Rights was a crucial addition to the Constitution, as it outlined the fundamental rights and freedoms that all Americans were entitled to. It was designed to protect the rights of individuals and prevent the government from overreaching its power.

The inclusion of the Bill of Rights was a significant factor in the eventual ratification of the Constitution. By 1788, enough states had ratified the Constitution for it to go into effect in early 1789. The few holdouts all ratified the document by 1790, bringing an end to the struggle and establishing the foundation of the American government.

The ratification of the Constitution was a chaotic and unpredictable process, reflecting the complex and divisive nature of the young American Republic. The Bill of Rights played a crucial role in this process, addressing the concerns of those who feared the concentration of power in the federal government and helping to secure the support needed for ratification.

Explore related products

Contested Conventions

$25 $27

The Debate on the Constitution. 2 Volumes, in Slipcase. Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles, and Letters During the Struggle Over Ratification

$205

The Debate on the Constitution: Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles, and Letters During the Struggle over Ratification Vol. 2 (LOA #63) ... America Debate on Constitution Collection)

$19.99

The Founding Fathers Guide to the Constitution

$16.99 $17.16

Making Sense of the Constitution: A Primer on the Supreme Court and Its Struggle to Apply Our Fundamental Law

$34.95 $24.95

Our Declaration: A Reading of the Declaration of Independence in Defense of Equality

$15.28 $17.99

The Constitution's validity

The validity of the Constitution was not always seen as self-evident. The framers of the Constitution knew that it would only have real power if all thirteen states ratified it, but there was a fierce debate between the Federalists and the Antifederalists. The Federalists supported the new Constitution and a strong federal government, while the Antifederalists, a diverse group that included small farmers, shopkeepers, and prominent men, argued that it took power away from the states and the people. The debate over ratification from 1787 to 1789 was extremely bitter and divided Americans. The Federalists agreed to add a bill of rights to the Constitution as soon as possible after ratification, which convinced some in the middle to back the new document. By 1788, enough states had ratified the Constitution so that it went into effect in early 1789. The few holdouts all ratified the document by 1790.

The ratification of the Constitution was a chaotic, unpredictable, and nerve-wracking process, very much in line with the history of the creation of the American Republic. Scholars have differing interpretations of ratification. Some see it as fulfilling the ideals of the American Revolution, while others view it as a reversal of democratizing impulses, even a coup. Despite the struggles and differing interpretations, the Constitution has persisted for over two centuries, and its validity is now seen by many as self-evident.

The Constitution's impact on states' power

The Constitution was completed in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787. The framers of the Constitution knew that it would only have real power if all thirteen states ratified it. The debate over ratification from 1787 to 1789 was extremely bitter and divided Americans into two factions: the Federalists, who supported the new Constitution, and the Antifederalists, who advocated for states' rights. The Antifederalists were a diverse group that included small farmers and shopkeepers, as well as prominent men such as Patrick Henry, George Mason, and Elbridge Gerry. Their chief complaint about the Constitution was that it took power away from the states, thereby taking power away from the people. The Federalists agreed to add a bill of rights to the Constitution as soon as possible after ratification, which convinced some in the middle to back the new document. By 1788, enough states had ratified the Constitution so that it went into effect in early 1789. The few holdouts all ratified the document by 1790.

The Federalists eventually succeeded in swaying their counterparts to ratify the Constitution. This was achieved through a series of compromises, including the agreement to add a bill of rights to the Constitution as soon as possible after ratification. The Federalists also emphasised the benefits of a strong federal government, such as the ability to regulate interstate commerce, provide for national defence, and establish a uniform system of laws.

The ratification of the Constitution marked a significant shift in the balance of power between the states and the federal government. While the states retained certain powers and rights under the Tenth Amendment, the federal government assumed a more prominent role in governing the nation. The Constitution established a system of checks and balances, with the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of the federal government serving as a counterweight to the power of the states.

The impact of the Constitution on states' power continues to be a subject of debate and interpretation. Some scholars view the ratification as a fulfilment of the ideals of the American Revolution, while others see it as a reversal of democratising impulses. The Constitution's impact on states' power remains a complex and multifaceted aspect of American political history, shaping the country's governance and identity.

Frequently asked questions