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
Which of the following terms refer to a law that allows individuals to be prosecuted for an action that, when committed, was not
Yuliya22 [10]
I think it’s possibly a I’m sorry if I’m wrong
7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
How can you institute a criminal action
natali 33 [55]
Criminal procedure deals with the set of rules governing the series of proceedings through which the government enforces substantive criminal law.
3 0
3 years ago
How much is law school a year?
Wewaii [24]
<h2>Answer:</h2>

<em><u>(16,800-$34,300 on average)-based on if its public or private.</u></em>

<em><u /></em>

<em><u>Thank you for asking this great question need any other help please let me know by commenting below I'd be glad to help.</u></em>

<em><u /></em>

<em><u> I'd also greatly appreciate you if you mark me as brainliest and click that thanks button.( optional )</u></em>

<em><u /></em>

<em><u>Your brainly friend ( lauralit1 )</u></em>

<em><u /></em>

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Identify, discuss, and resolve the conflict between the right to free speech and the government’s regulation of the practice of
soldier1979 [14.2K]

Answer:

언론의 자유와 정부의 법률 관행 규정 사이의 갈등을 식별, 토론 및 해결

Explanation:

THERE YOU GO

8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Whats your opinion on the year we've had so far?
Talja [164]

Answer:

Bad but I can see it turn it a little good

8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • How often does apportionment of the House of Representative occur?
    15·2 answers
  • Which structural characteristic is most evident in the excerpts from the United States Constitution? A) the United States uses a
    8·1 answer
  • 2. What are the three parts of the executive branch?
    9·2 answers
  • The fordney-mccumber act of 1922 helped boost the american economy by
    12·1 answer
  • Which of the following statements best describes the role that ethics play in a criminal justice professional's discretionary de
    10·1 answer
  • Does anybody have any recommendations on sites where I can learn about law or how to become a lawyer. Im in 8th grade
    5·1 answer
  • Please help on any one that you know thank you
    6·1 answer
  • PLEASE HELP ! need for today<br><br><br>PLEASE EXPLAIN
    14·2 answers
  • Describe the impeachment process. Why are public officials impeached? What is the 25th Amendment? How is it used? Why is it used
    10·1 answer
  • Explain the ways a citizen can participate in the affairs of their country​
    7·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!