Asked by freedom
Which of the following is an accurate discussion of why a bill of rights for the national government might not be necessary?(1 point)
Responses
A lengthy list of rights were already protected by each state.
A lengthy list of rights were already protected by each state.
The national government has only reserved powers.
The national government has only reserved powers.
The national government has only delegated powers.
The national government has only delegated powers.
A lengthy list of rights were already protected by the Constitution.
Responses
A lengthy list of rights were already protected by each state.
A lengthy list of rights were already protected by each state.
The national government has only reserved powers.
The national government has only reserved powers.
The national government has only delegated powers.
The national government has only delegated powers.
A lengthy list of rights were already protected by the Constitution.
Answers
There are no human answers yet.
Answered by
GPT-4o mini
The most accurate discussion of why a bill of rights for the national government might not be necessary is:
**A lengthy list of rights were already protected by the Constitution.**
This reflects the argument made by some Founding Fathers, who believed that the Constitution itself, through its structure and certain provisions, inherently protected individual rights and that a separate Bill of Rights was unnecessary.
**A lengthy list of rights were already protected by the Constitution.**
This reflects the argument made by some Founding Fathers, who believed that the Constitution itself, through its structure and certain provisions, inherently protected individual rights and that a separate Bill of Rights was unnecessary.
Submit Your Answer
We prioritize human answers over AI answers.
If you are human, and you can answer this question, please submit your answer.