A common worry among opponents of the Constitution was that without a Bill of Rights, ...

A common worry among opponents of the Constitution was that without a Bill of Rights, ...

• A. The federal government would be too weak
• B. Individual rights would not be protected
• C. The states would lose all autonomy
• D. The Constitution would be impossible to amend

Answer: (B)

The key idea is that explicit protections for individual liberties are necessary to keep the government from infringing on people’s rights. Opponents worried that, without a Bill of Rights, the new federal government could act in ways that limit freedoms because the Constitution didn’t specifically list rights to shield people from government actions. The Bill of Rights was added to spell out those protections—listing freedoms like speech, religion, and assembly, guarantees of due process and a fair trial, protections against unreasonable searches, and more—so the government’s power would be checked and individual rights safeguarded. That’s why the statement about rights not being protected without such a set of guarantees is the best fit. The other ideas miss the focus: the concern was not that the federal government would be too weak, nor that states would lose all autonomy, and it wasn’t about the amendment process itself.

The key idea is that explicit protections for individual liberties are necessary to keep the government from infringing on people’s rights. Opponents worried that, without a Bill of Rights, the new federal government could act in ways that limit freedoms because the Constitution didn’t specifically list rights to shield people from government actions. The Bill of Rights was added to spell out those protections—listing freedoms like speech, religion, and assembly, guarantees of due process and a fair trial, protections against unreasonable searches, and more—so the government’s power would be checked and individual rights safeguarded. That’s why the statement about rights not being protected without such a set of guarantees is the best fit. The other ideas miss the focus: the concern was not that the federal government would be too weak, nor that states would lose all autonomy, and it wasn’t about the amendment process itself.