The Bill of Rights is the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution. These amendments guarantee essential rights and civil liberties, such as the freedom of religion, the right to free speech, the right to bear arms, trial by jury, and more, as well as reserving rights to the people and the states. After the Constitutional Convention, the absence of a bill of rights emerged as a central part of the ratification debates. Anti-Federalists, who opposed ratification, pointed to the missing bill of rights as a fatal flaw. Several states ratified the Constitution on the condition that a bill of rights be promptly added. Pop over to the National Constitution Center’s learning module to discover more!
Documents and Debates in American History and Government – Vol. 1, 1493-1865
The Core Documents Collection – Documents and Debates is structured around a series of topics, each based on a question for debate. For each topic, there is a collection of documents that, together, form the basis of argument over that topic – from those who debated it at a given point in American history. Volume One covers 1493-1865, and Volume Two covers 1865-2009.
The goal is to explore a series of critical moments in American history by asking questions for which there are not simple yes/no answers, but instead call for informed discussion and rational debate. The Documents and Debates readers also include appendices of additional documents, and together are a perfect fit for any American History survey course, including AP U.S. History.
George Washington and Ratification
This short video suggests that George Washington’s vision for an American empire was intimately connected to his desire for constitutional ratification. Though he played no public role in the ratification debates, he was in constant contact with the Federalist supporters of the Constitution. As Professor W.B. Allen points out, Washington was aware of all the debates, but his influence was completely invisible to the public.
The Printers’ Role in Constitutional Ratification
This short video examines the role played by America’s newspaper printers in the ratification debates. Over 80% of all papers supported the new Constitution and played a significant role in supporting the Federalist cause. Professor John Kaminski explains how and why the newspapers helped to drive the ratification debates.
Women Participate in the Ratification Debate
This short video assesses the role of “female politicians”: women who were interested in discussing the ratification politics and processes. The most visible of these was Mercy Otis Warren who, writing as “a Columbian Patriot,” opposed many aspects of the Constitution as undermining liberty. Professor Rosemarie Zagarri notes that many women throughout the country were thinking, talking, and reading about the ratification debates.
Key Individuals in Constitutional Ratification
This short video offers insights as to who were the most significant individuals in the ratification debates. Each state had its standouts: John Hancock in Massachusetts, Melancton Smith and Alexander Hamilton in New York; James Madison in Virginia. However, Professor John Kaminski concludes that George Washington, despite his reservations about becoming involved in the debate, was the most influential figure in securing ratification of the Constitution.
Popular Sovereignty and Constitutional Ratification
This short video highlights the importance of popular sovereignty in the ratification debates. The people themselves, through their elected delegates in specially-called conventions, voted up or down on the new Constitution. Professor John Kaminksi notes how the Antifederalists also used the principle of popular sovereignty to justify their call for constitutional amendments.
Founding Documents: Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers Podcast
Ten days after the Constitution was signed at the Old Philadelphia State House, an anonymous op-ed appeared in the New York Journal. Signed by “”Cato,” it cautioned readers of the new Constitution to take it with a grain of salt. Even the wisest of men, it warned, can make mistakes. This launched a public debate that would last months, pitting pro-Constitution Federalists against Constitution-wary Anti-Federalists. It was a battle for ratification, and it resulted in a glimpse into the minds of our Framers – and a concession that would come to define American identity.
Our guides through the minds of the Federalists and Anti-Federalists are Claire Griffin and Cheryl Cook-Kallio.
This short episode includes a one-page Graphic Organizer for students to take notes on while listening, as well as discussion questions on the back side.
Article VII: Ratification
After months of debate during the hot Philadelphia summer, on September 17, 1787, the Constitutional Convention finally adjourned and the new Constitution was signed, but it was not the law of the land yet. According to Article VII of the document, nine of 13 states would have to ratify (or approve) the new Constitution before it would officially replace the Articles of Confederation as our governing document.
Why We the People? Citizens as Agents of Constitutional Change
Constitutional scholar Linda R. Monk’s “Why We the People? Citizens as Agents of Constitutional Change” introduces us to one of the most radical ideas embodied in the Constitution: that ultimate sovereignty lies with the citizens themselves. It was this principle, Monk reminds us, that prompted the demand, during the ratification debates, that a bill of rights be added to the Constitution. Free registration for students and teachers required to access resource.