Chapter 4: Federalist Papers vs. AntiFederalist Papers
Content Statement:
The Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers framed
the national debate over the basic principles of government
encompassed by the Constitution of the United States.
I.
Federalists
A. For ratification of the Constitution
B. Wanted a stronger federal government
C. This would solve problems of the Articles of
Confederation
D. State power would have to give way to general welfare of
the nation
E. Federal power was defined and limited
F. However, states would still hold some power
II. Anti-Federalists
A. Against ratification of the Constitution
B. Believed the Constitution gave the federal government
too much power
C. Wanted more power reserved to the states
D. Argued the “necessary and proper” and “supremacy”
clauses gave the federal government too much power
Federalists can be said to have won the overall debate
on the basic principles of government with the
ratification of the Constitution of the United States. AntiFederalists did achieve some success with the limitations
on government embraced by the Bill of Rights.
***Both sides prepared essays to influence the
debates at the Constitutional Convention. The essays
were called the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers.
Have students read excerpts from the Federalist Papers,
No. 44, “Restrictions on the Authority of the Several
States,” and No. 45, “The Alleged Danger from the Powers
of the Union to the State Governments Considered” as well
as excerpts from the Anti-Federalist Papers, “A
Consolidated Government is Tyranny” and “Federalist
Power Will Ultimately Subvert State Authority.” Conduct
small-group discussions followed by a large-group
discussion on the relative merits of the arguments set
forth. Have students consider which side in this debate
they support given present-day circumstances.
Link to the Federalist Papers
Link to translation of the Federalist Papers
Link to Anti-Federalist Papers