Which of the following is an accurate discussion of why a bill of rights for the national government might not be necessary?

A. A lengthy list of rights were already protected by each state.
B. The national government has only reserved powers.
C. The national government has only delegated powers.
D. A lengthy list of rights were already protected by the Constitution.

1 answer

The correct answer is C. The national government has only delegated powers.

The argument for why a bill of rights for the national government might not be necessary is based on the idea that the national government was created with only specific powers that are delegated to it by the Constitution. Since the federal government could not overreach beyond these powers, it was argued that there was no need to explicitly enumerate rights that the government could not violate. However, this concept was debated, ultimately leading to the adoption of the Bill of Rights to address concerns about protecting individual liberties.

Answer A is misleading because while states did protect rights, this does not negate the need for federal protections. Answer B is incorrect because the national government has enumerated powers and is not limited to reserved powers. Answer D is also not entirely accurate, as the Constitution initially did not include a specific Bill of Rights, which was a point of contention.