Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists Essay

Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists Essay

Instructions/Descriptions

Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists Essay

[Order Now]

1) Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists

In order to truly understand the purpose of the Bill of Rights and their significance, it is necessary to discuss the debate between two groups of early Americans: the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists.  These were two groups of people with very different ideas about the how much power the federal government should have.  This debate and conflict was particularly important in the years preceding the writing of the Constitution.  The Bill of Rights can be seen as a compromise between these two groups of people.

___________________________________________________________________

FEDERALISTS

One important and influential group of people were called the Federalists.  Their name tells you a lot about what they wanted: they wanted the Constitution to establish a strong and relatively powerful federal government.

After the failure of the Articles of Confederation, this was a group that felt strongly that a better approach would be to design a new constitution that created a strong federal government that would have power over the different states.

James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay were notable Federalists.  They were also the authors of The Federalist Paperswhich were a collection of essays supporting the passage the new Constitution.  They are important essays and are a good insight into why people wanted a new constitution.

Here is a link to an article that broadly discusses the Federalist Papers  (Links to an external site.)(this is not required reading, but is it interesting).

______[Order Now]_____________________________________________________________

ANTI-FEDERALISTS

On the other side were a group of people called the Anti-Federalists.  Again, their name indicates what they wanted: a new constitution that DID NOT give too much power to the federal government and wanted to make sure states retained a relatively large amount of power.  They were concerned that a new constitution would give the federal government a lot of power and that the federal government would then become dictatorial or monarchical.  Anti-Federalists opposed the new constitution.  Notable anti-federalists included Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry.

The Anti-Federalists were ultimately defeated (obviously since we have the Constitution!)  However, they were still an important group of people because they were instrumental in the design and passage of the Bill of Rights.

There were also Anti-Federalist Papers which were written in opposition to the new Constitution.

Lastly, it is important to note that not all of the Founding Fathers were united on what the role of the government should be or what the new Constitution should say.  The debate and disagreement between the two groups ultimately strengthened the Constitution and is a reason why we have the Bill of Rights.

2) 4th Amendment

Here is the exact wording of the 4th Amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

One of the questions about the Constitution is whether it talks about the topic of PRIVACY.  Meaning, do we have a Constitutional right to privacy?  The simple answer is “no” because the word privacy is not used in the Constitution.  But simply because the word is not used does not mean the right does not exist.

Many point to the 4th Amendment as IMPLYING a right to privacy.  This amendment makes it clear that our person and stuff cannot be searched and taken from us for no reason.  This seems to suggest we have a right to some privacy.

So there are some questions that arise from this amendment:

• What is meant by the word “unreasonable” in the passage “unreasonable searches and seizures?”
• What constitutes “probable cause?”
• How much privacy should we expect?  How much power should the government have in interfering with our privacy, especially if they think we are a threat in some way?  Meaning, if the government thinks we are a danger in some way, do we still maintain rights to privacy? Additionally, what are the limits to our right to privacy?

Watch the video below for more information about the 4th amendment.   This is a required video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4O1OlGyTuU

*For clarification from the video, if the police pull you over, that is not necessarily probable cause to search your vehicle UNLESS you grant them permission to search it OR they clearly see something illegal in the car (like a large amount of cocaine in the backseat).  They might also have probable cause if they suspect that the reason you are speeding is because you are fleeing the scene of a crime (as mentioned in the video).  As you can see, this is all VERY confusing and complicated and often things are decided on a case-by-case basis.  But part of the confusion results from the rather vaguely worded 4th Amendment.

3) 8th Amendment

[Order Now]

Here is the exact wording of the 8th Amendment:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

A few key components of this amendment are the mention of “bail” and “cruel and unusual punishment.”  Bail is the temporary release of an accused person awaiting trial.  Usually the release from jail is on the condition that they pay a certain amount of money and promise to reappear for their trial.

There are a number of debates that arise from this amendment:

What constitutes “excessive” bail?  Recently, https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/08/29/california-abolish-cash-bail-reformers-unhappy-219618

to address the issue of excessive bail and how lower-income people are often disproportionately subjected to having to pay bail in excess of what they are capable.

• What constitutes “cruel and unusual punishment?”  Is the death penalty “cruel and unusual punishment?”  Are our prisons “cruel and unusual?”
• Can you think of any of any examples of cruel and unusual punishment in our legal system or in what the police do?

Please watch the video below for more of a discussion on the idea of cruel and unusual punishment.  This is a required video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPVzWAcCyl8

Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists Essay

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!