Respuesta :
Antifederalists argued that a bill of rights was necessary because, the supremacy clause in combination with the necessary and proper and general welfare clauses would allow implied powers that could endanger rights. Federalists rejected the proposition that a bill of rights was needed.
Before the United States Constitution, there was the Articles of Confederation. The Articles of Confederation was known for being very weak and giving little power to the national government. Under the Articles of Confederation, the national government could not tax the states, draft soldiers, regulate trade, or even create and enforce laws properly.
Over time, people started to realize just how weak the Articles of Confederation was and wanted something different. The people who were in favor of amending the Articles of Confederation and giving more power to the national government were called Federalists. On the other hand, the people who wanted to keep the Articles of Confederation how it was and were in favor of having strong state governments were called Anti-Federalists.
During the Constitutional Convention of 1787, the original goal was just to amend the Articles of Confederation. This did not happen though and they ended up getting scrapped, while the United States Constitution was created instead. The Anti-Federalists said they would only agree with the United States Constitution if a Bill of Rights was added, as they were scared that the new and powerful national government may abuse its power onto the citizens.