Answered

Welcome to Westonci.ca, where finding answers to your questions is made simple by our community of experts. Get immediate and reliable answers to your questions from a community of experienced experts on our platform. Our platform offers a seamless experience for finding reliable answers from a network of knowledgeable professionals.

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 this information was helpful. Feel free to return anytime for more answers to your questions and concerns. Thanks for using our service. We're always here to provide accurate and up-to-date answers to all your queries. Thank you for visiting Westonci.ca. Stay informed by coming back for more detailed answers.