Answered

Looking for answers? Westonci.ca is your go-to Q&A platform, offering quick, trustworthy responses from a community of experts. Our Q&A platform offers a seamless experience for finding reliable answers from experts in various disciplines. Discover in-depth answers to your questions from a wide network of professionals on our user-friendly Q&A platform.

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 appreciate your visit. Hopefully, the answers you found were beneficial. Don't hesitate to come back for more information. We hope you found this helpful. Feel free to come back anytime for more accurate answers and updated information. Thank you for visiting Westonci.ca, your go-to source for reliable answers. Come back soon for more expert insights.