Pros and Cons Do We Need a Bill of Rights? Summary THERE IS ATTACHED A PICURE OF THE ASSIGNMENT, I NEED 2 PAGES FOR IT, NO SOURCES REQUIRED. I JUST NEED YO

Pros and Cons Do We Need a Bill of Rights? Summary THERE IS ATTACHED A PICURE
OF THE ASSIGNMENT, I NEED 2 PAGES FOR IT, NO SOURCES REQUIRED. I JUST NEED YOU
TO SUMMARIZE THE TEXT ON THE PICTURE AND PICK A SIDE (1 PROS OR 2 CONS), AND EXPLAIN
WHY YOU PICKED THE SIDE. S
The Struggle over Ratification
51
Pro & Con
Do We Need a Bill of
Rights?
granted. Wilson further reasoned that “If we attempt
an enumeration, everything that is not enumerated
is presumed to be given. The consequence is that
an imperfect enumeration would throw all implied
The Federalists contended that adding a bill of rights to
power into the scale of the government; and the rights
the Constitution was not only unnecessary, but posi-
of the people would be rendered incomplete.” Wilson
tively dangerous. It was unnecessary for two reasons:
was by no means the only prominent Federalist to
first, because the structure of the Constitution was
oppose a bill of rights.
Anti-Federalists argued that the people demanded
designed to protect the rights of the people through the explicit protection for traditional rights including
principles of delegation, representation, separation of freedom of speech, press, religion, search and seizure,
powers, bicameralism, checks and balances, and feder- speedy trial, and more. If Federalists worried that a
alism; and second, because the Constitution was com- short list of rights might leave something off, make a
posed of delegated powers and powers not given were long list. Besides, they argued, clear protection of some
retained by the people. It was positively dangerous critical rights and liberties was better than none.
because to list some rights might suggest that rights Eventually, Thomas Jefferson and others convinced
not listed were not retained or claimed by the people. James Madison of the importance of a national bill of
James Wilson, a leading member of the Philadel- rights. Madison convinced his colleagues in the first
phia convention and an important lawyer in that city, House of Representatives that a bill of rights was neces-
was the chief defender of the proposed Constitution sary to “quiet that anxiety which prevails in the public
in Pennsylvania. In his famous State House speech mind” and to “stifle the voice of complaint, and make
of October 6, 1787, Wilson presented an argument friends of many who doubted [the Constitution’s]
that became the standard Federalist case against merits.” The first ten amendments to the Constitution,
adding a bill of rights to the Constitution. Wilson’s known as the Bill of Rights, went into effect on Decem-
“reserved powers theory” held that the Constitution ber 15, 1791.
provides for a government of limited and enumer-
ated powers, so “every thing which is not given” to What do you think?
the national government “is reserved” by the people. • If the Federalists had prevailed, and no Bill of Rights
Under these circumstances, Wilson contended, no bill had been added to the Constitution, how might that
of rights would be needed because the government have changed the course of our national development?
• Would those changes have been for good or ill?
has power to act only where power has been expressly
PRO
CON
The people deserve a bill of rights
Make a long list
Protecting some rights is better than none
The Constitution’s structure protects rights
Some rights might be left off any list
Powers not granted cannot be abused
If diversity means that no oppressive majority is likely to form in society
and press its demands on government, then one has only to guard against
oppressive tendencies arising within government itself. Madison and his col-

Purchase answer to see full
attachment