What do you think about Federalist No. 84 by Alexander Hamilton?

Federalist No 84

This Site Might Help You.

RE:

What do you think about Federalist No. 84 by Alexander Hamilton?

While I'm in broad agreement with "ammianus," I'm not sure Hamilton's argument can be so easily dismissed. One of the reasons a Bill of Rights was not included in the original document was the genuine concern expressed by one of the delegates from Georgia that the rights of the people are too numerous, and if we attempt to codify them, we will invariably omit some, leaving future generations to claim that since the right was not specifically mentioned, then it does not exist. Better to say nothing and assume many rights, then mention some and give others an opening to say that only the mentioned rights exist

This fear has actually been manifested many times over the centuries by successive Supreme Court decisions, which deny the existence of implied (or, penumbal) rights (an example of which is the implied Right of Privacy). In short, their argument goes, "If it's not explicitly mentioned, then it doesn't exist." Madison preemptively attempted to diffuse this argument in framing the 9th amendment, but still the argument persists.

So while Hamilton's default argument of the government having no power to take away peoples' rights is rather naïve, the argument of exclusion actually has merit.

Rather a dull read,I find - and Hamilton does not help by filling it with specious arguments about why a Bill of Rights was not necessary.

Can u plz go back to my post again?:P