Who opposed the Constitution on the grounds of state's rights?
The Federalists oppsed the Bill of Rights, they opposed it because they thought that the Constitution had already given its citizens rights and they feared that the Bill of Rights might even limit people to those specific rights and that it gave the government too much power and limited the states the right to self-governship.
According to the U.S. Constitution, states' rights come naturally from the rights of the citizens in the states, who get their rights from God. The Constitution only guarantees those rights of the states and individuals that already exist. (This is how the Constitution puts it, not a modern political statement.) The only rights that the Constitution creates are rights of the Federal (U.S.) government. Another way to make this point is that whatever responsibilities are…
The Bill of Rights was a series of amendments added to the United States Constitution after its ratification that limited the powers of the government by protecting the rights of citizens from governmental power. The Bill of Rights was added in order to reassure the Anti-Federalists, who had opposed ratification of the Constitution because they were afraid that its powers were too overreaching.
Anti-federalists opposed the ratification of the Constitution in 1787 - 89. They rejected the idea of a strong, central government. They feared that states, and mostly individuals, would lose their rights, and thus demanded that a Bill of Rights be created before they would even consider ratifying the Constitution.
The antifederalists opposed the constitution because their leading argument, however, centered on the constitutions lack of protection for individual rights. Gabriel Marrero the anti federalists didn't want the union to have a strong central government, but wanted more power for the individual states. the constitution was lacking a Bill of Rights, which is why the anti-federalists agreed when that was later added.
Patrick Henry served for the Virgina State Convention, which was called to ratify the constitution. He opposed the ratification of the US Constitution because he believed it endangered the rights of individuals and states. After the loss, an acceptance of the US Constitution was apparent by Henry, he then joined the Federalist. He was, in a sense, largley responsible for the Bill of Rights. Answered by Tim Nortman
The Anti federalist didn't want to ratify the Constitution because they thought it took to much power away from the states. The Constitution called for a strong central government which meant that most of the powers would be held by the central government opposed to the state's government's. The Anti-Federalist also wanted a Bill of Rights with the Constitution to ensure the people rights.
The emmeration in the constitution of certain rights shall not be constructed to deny or to disparage others retained by the people?
Patrick Henry opposed the adoption of the Constitution because he did not support a strong central federal government. He saw this type of government as a way back to a monarchy. He believed that the Constitution would deprive individuals and states of their rights. While he never supported the Constitution he was instrumental in ensuring that the Bill of Rights was included in the first ten amendments to the Constitution, thereby restricting the powers of…