1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
mrs_skeptik [129]
3 years ago
5

Why is the Bill of Rights still controversial today?

Law
2 answers:
pantera1 [17]3 years ago
8 0
Antifederalists argued that in a state of nature people were entirely free. In society some rights were yielded for the common good. But, there were some rights so fundamental that to give them up would be contrary to the common good. These rights, which should always be retained by the people, needed to be explicitly stated in a bill of rights that would clearly define the limits of government. A bill of rights would serve as a fire bell for the people, enabling them to immediately know when their rights were threatened.

Additionally, some Antifederalists argued that the protections of a bill of rights was especially important under the Constitution, which was an original compact with the people. State bills of rights offered no protection from oppressive acts of the federal government because the Constitution, treaties and laws made in pursuance of the Constitution were declared to be the supreme law of the land. Antifederalists argued that a bill of rights was necessary because, the supremacy clause in combination with the necessary and proper and general welfare clauses would allow implied powers that could endanger rights.

Federalists rejected the proposition that a bill of rights was needed. They made a clear distinction between the state constitutions and the U.S. Constitution. Using the language of social compact, Federalists asserted that when the people formed their state constitutions, they delegated to the state all rights and powers which were not explicitly reserved to the people. The state governments had broad authority to regulate even personal and private matters. But in the U.S. Constitution, the people or the states retained all rights and powers that were not positively granted to the federal government. In short, everything not given was reserved. The U.S. government only had strictly delegated powers, limited to the general interests of the nation. Consequently, a bill of rights was not necessary and was perhaps a dangerous proposition. It was unnecessary because the new federal government could in no way endanger the freedoms of the press or religion since it was not granted any authority to regulate either. It was dangerous because any listing of rights could potentially be interpreted as exhaustive. Rights omitted could be considered as not retained. Finally, Federalists believed that bills of rights in history had been nothing more than paper protections, useless when they were most needed. In times of crisis they had been and would continue to be overridden. The people’s rights are best secured not by bills of rights, but by auxiliary precautions: the division and separation of powers, bicameralism, and a representative form of government in which officeholders were responsible to the people, derive their power from the people, and would themselves suffer from the loss of basic rights.

Hope this helps
aleksley [76]3 years ago
7 0

Answer:

Because liberals want the government to be in charge and for us to be a communist s hole

You might be interested in
my mom will lose her job if biden is elected and so will most of my family so can we just vote trump and then next election vote
makvit [3.9K]
Biden 2020, trump will make people lose their jobs not Biden
6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
List down 20 human rights<br>​
Crank

Answer:

Here are 30 Human Rights

Explanation:

Article 1: Right to Equality

Article 2: Freedom from Discrimination

Article 3: Right to Life, Liberty, Personal Security

Article 4: Freedom from Slavery

Article 5: Freedom from Torture and Degrading Treatment

Article 6: Right to Recognition as a Person before the Law

Article 7: Right to Equality before the Law

Article 8: Right to Remedy by Competent Tribunal

Article 9: Freedom from Arbitrary Arrest and Exile

Article 10: Right to Fair Public Hearing

Article 11: Right to be Considered Innocent until Proven Guilty

Article 12: Freedom from Interference with Privacy, Family, Home and Correspondence

Article 13: Right to Free Movement in and out of the Country

Article 14: Right to Asylum in other Countries from Persecution

Article 15: Right to a Nationality and the Freedom to Change It

Article 16: Right to Marriage and Family

Article 17: Right to Own Property

Article 18: Freedom of Belief and Religion

Article 19: Freedom of Opinion and Information

Article 20: Right of Peaceful Assembly and Association

Article 21: Right to Participate in Government and in Free Elections

Article 22: Right to Social Security

Article 23: Right to Desirable Work and to Join Trade Unions

Article 24: Right to Rest and Leisure

Article 25: Right to Adequate Living Standard

Article 26: Right to Education

Article 27: Right to Participate in the Cultural Life of Community

Article 28: Right to a Social Order that Articulates this Document

Article 29: Community Duties Essential to Free and Full Development

Article 30: Freedom from State or Personal Interference in the above Rights

3 0
2 years ago
It is to get behind the wheel with out thinking
Andre45 [30]

Answer:

Highway hypnosis is the condition of when you drive/get behind the wheel without thinking or having proper consciousness.

Explanation:

7 0
2 years ago
Please help? ill give 38 points.
otez555 [7]

Answer:

The Clean Air Act (CAA) is the comprehensive federal law that regulates air emissions from stationary and mobile sources. Among other things, this law authorizes EPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to protect public health and public welfare and to regulate emissions of hazardous air pollutants. One of the goals of the Act was to set and achieve NAAQS in every state by 1975 in order to address the public health and welfare risks posed by certain widespread air pollutants. The setting of these pollutant standards was coupled with directing the states to develop state implementation plans (SIPs), applicable to appropriate industrial sources in the state, in order to achieve these standards. The Act was amended in 1977 and 1990 primarily to set new goals (dates) for achieving attainment of NAAQS since many areas of the country had failed to meet the deadlines. Section 112 of the Clean Air Act addresses emissions of hazardous air pollutants. Prior to 1990, CAA established a risk-based program under which only a few standards were developed. The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments revised Section 112 to first require the issuance of technology-based standards for major sources and certain area sources. "Major sources" are defined as a stationary source or group of stationary sources that emit or have the potential to emit 10 tons per year or more of a hazardous air pollutant or 25 tons per year or more of a combination of hazardous air pollutants. An "area source" is any stationary source that is not a major source. For major sources, Section 112 requires that EPA establish emission standards that require the maximum degree of reduction in emissions of hazardous air pollutants. These emission standards are commonly referred to as "maximum achievable control technology" or "MACT" standards. Eight years after the technology-based MACT standards are issued for a source category, EPA is required to review those standards to determine whether any residual risk exists for that source category and, if necessary, revise the standards to address such risk.

Explanation: im just different

7 0
3 years ago
In conspiracy cases, in addition to being charged with conspiracy, each person can also be charged with crimes committed by the
Natali5045456 [20]
Not enough mens rea no
4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • The argument that drug laws are a tool for the wealthy to control the dangerous classes is consistent with the: Select one: a. C
    10·1 answer
  • Forum non conveniens: a. is a principle of U.S. justice. b. is a principle of jurisdiction. c. can require a case to be sent out
    6·1 answer
  • What order do these go in:
    7·1 answer
  • Roland carries out various responsibilities as a part of the US police force. He is in charge of patrolling and important invest
    7·1 answer
  • Proposition 47 raised the value of petty theft (loss separating a misdemeanor from a wobbler) from $450 to
    12·1 answer
  • Which of the following is the best example of populism?
    13·1 answer
  • The Great Compromise called for representation in the House of Representatives to be based on
    5·1 answer
  • What do you think makes a particular action a crime ?
    15·2 answers
  • Free<br> free<br> free<br> free<br> free<br> free<br> free
    8·2 answers
  • What makes american law enforcement differ from law enforcement agencies around the world
    13·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!