Which option best captures the Anti-Federalists' stance on the Bill of Rights?

• A. They believed a Bill of Rights was unnecessary
• B. They favored a strong central government
• C. They favored centralized power without protections
• D. They supported adding a Bill of Rights to protect against tyranny

Answer: (D)

The Anti-Federalists prioritized protecting individual liberties from a strong central government and argued for a written Bill of Rights to curb federal power. The option that states they supported adding a Bill of Rights to protect against tyranny best captures that stance. They feared the new national government could infringe on basic freedoms unless there was a clear, enumerated list of protections to constrain its authority. In the broader context, the Constitution hadn’t enumerated rights, which is why the Bill of Rights was championed and later added as the first ten amendments to safeguard freedoms like speech, religion, and due process. The other ideas—viewing a Bill of Rights as unnecessary or wanting a stronger centralized government without protections—misalign with the Anti-Federalists’ core concern: limiting federal power to prevent tyranny.