The Federalists vs. The Antifederalists

1. Set Focus
Pose this essential question: What is the role of our federal government?

2. List Vocabulary
Share some of the challenging vocabulary words in the article. Encourage students to use context to infer meanings as they read.

• ratifying (p. 18)
• disjointed (p. 20)
• commerce (p. 20)
• inference (p. 20)
• factions (p. 21)
• executive orders (p. 21)

3. Engage
Explain that students are going to read about how the development of the Constitution led to an argument over the role of the federal government versus the role of state governments and how individual rights are best protected. Ask: Why do you think Americans disagreed about this issue? Do they still disagree about this issue? 

4. Read and Discuss
Ask students to read the Upfront article about the argument between the Federalists and the Antifederalists. Review why the article is a secondary source. (It was written by someone who didn’t personally experience or witness the events.) Then pose these critical-thinking questions and ask students to cite text evidence when answering them:

• What issues did the Federalists believe the new Constitution was going to fix and why? (The Federalists felt that the Articles of Confederation made the federal government so weak that it couldn’t pay its debts, regulate commerce, or compel states to follow federal law. The new Constitution, however, included a “supremacy clause,” which said federal law would supercede state laws in many cases, and it also set up a more robust central government, which included a new federal judiciary, executive branch, and expanded legislature.)

• What argument did Antifederalists make against the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause and why? (Antifederalists thought the supremacy clause gave too much power to the federal government, so that it could overpower state governments whenever it chose. They disagreed with that, arguing that state governments, being closer to their constituents, were better able to represent the will of their citizens, which they felt was more important than following federal laws.)

• What concerns did Antifederalists have about the role of the president? Why did Federalists believe a president was preferable to an executive council? (Antifederalists felt that a president might become another king because too much responsibility was being given to one person, as opposed to a council. The Federalists thought a president would be easier than a council to hold accountable.)

• Why did the Antifederalists argue for the inclusion of a Bill of Rights and what was the Federalists’ response? (The Antifederalists wanted individual freedoms expressly listed because they felt that the government might otherwise behave as if people had no rights. Federalists thought it unnecessary. They believed that individual rights were implicitly understood to be protected.)

5. Use the Primary Source:
Project, distribute, or assign in Google Classroom the PDF ‘They Ought to Be Restrained,’ which features an excerpt from Patrick Henry’s 1788 speech to the Virginia Convention in which he argues for the inclusion of a Bill of Rights. Discuss what makes the speech a primary source.  (It provides firsthand evidence concerning the topic.) Have students read the excerpt and answer the questions below (which appear on the PDF without answers).

• How would you describe the tone and purpose of this excerpt from Henry’s speech? (The tone can be described as formal, passionate, and, in places, angry and fearful. The purpose is to convince the audience that individual rights must be expressly protected.)

• Which country does Henry refer to in his speech, and what does he say about it? Why might he have chosen this country? (Henry refers to Great Britain as an example of a nation where, if an individual’s rights are not expressly protected, they are left to the ruler to decide. He may have chosen Great Britain because the Americans had fought the British for their liberty, so this example would be more persuasive to the audience.)

• How does Henry think Congress might behave without a Bill of Rights and why? Explain. (Henry thinks Congress will tyrannically abuse their power if given the chance. Students should cite evidence from the speech to support their answers.) 

• What does Henry believe is the “palladium of our liberties”? Does he feel that it would be protected under the new Constitution? Explain. (Henry refers to the freedom of the press as the “palladium of our liberties.” Although he hopes that Congress would be decent enough not to impose censorship or to “intermeddle,” or interfere, with the freedoms of their constituents, he is not confident that they wouldn’t because they aren’t expressly prohibited from doing so under the new Constitution.)

• Based on the Upfront article and this excerpt, how did the argument that Henry lays out in this speech help to shape the Bill of Rights? (Freedom of the press is protected under the First Amendment, forced quartering is prohibited under the Third Amendment, the rights of the accused are covered in the Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Amendments. And, under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, individuals are granted additional rights not listed in the Constitution, and the states are granted any power that is not explicitly given to the federal government.)

6. Writing Prompt
In 1787, would you have been a Federalist or an Antifederalist? Write a brief essay explaining which side you would have supported and why, and whether your opinion would be different today.

7. Quiz
Use the quiz to assess comprehension.

8. Classroom Debate
Has the role of president become too powerful?

9. Speaking With Meaning
Assign each student a section from the primary source (or a full version of Henry’s speech). Have them make notes about how best to deliver their section (e.g., words to emphasize, when to pause). After students present their sections to the class, have them explain their choices.