Answered

Discover the answers you need at Westonci.ca, where experts provide clear and concise information on various topics. Explore a wealth of knowledge from professionals across various disciplines on our comprehensive Q&A platform. Join our Q&A platform to connect with experts dedicated to providing accurate answers to your questions in various fields.

Which of the following is not a reason some thought a Bill of Rights was unnecessary or dangerous?

A. Listing rights might imply some powers not originally intended, opening the door to government abuse.
B. The fear of not being re-elected would keep most politicians from attempting to limit the rights of the people.
C. The new government was limited to the powers listed in the Constitution and couldn't do anything else.
D. Forgetting to list something might mean we no longer have that right.

Sagot :

GinnyAnswer

Final answer:

The debate over the necessity of a Bill of Rights involved concerns about implied rights, abuse of power, and the adequacy of the Constitution's enumerated powers.


Explanation:

Alexander Hamilton argued that listing specific rights might be dangerous as it could imply that the rights not included were not protected, providing a pretext for abuse. The Federalists believed that the enumerated powers of Congress and limitations in the Constitution were sufficient, making a separate Bill of Rights unnecessary. On the other hand, opponents feared the new government's power and the lack of explicit rights protections, such as a Bill of Rights.


Learn more about Bill of Rights here:

https://brainly.com/question/46218321


We hope our answers were helpful. Return anytime for more information and answers to any other questions you may have. We appreciate your time. Please revisit us for more reliable answers to any questions you may have. Stay curious and keep coming back to Westonci.ca for answers to all your burning questions.