The Federalist Papers

The Federalist Papers

by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay

The Federalist Papers: Federalist No. 84 Summary & Analysis

Summary
Analysis
Alexander Hamilton responds to critics who argue that the Constitution should include a Bill of Rights. He contends that such a document is unnecessary because the Constitution itself is structured to protect individual liberties. Unlike monarchies, where governments grant rights to the people, the U.S. government derives its power from the people, meaning that any authority not explicitly given to it remains with the public. Since the Constitution does not grant the government the power to infringe on freedoms such as speech or the press, there is no need to list those rights explicitly.
Hamilton’s rejection of a Bill of Rights reflects a deeper philosophical stance on the nature of constitutional governance. Rather than viewing rights as privileges granted by the state, he treats them as inherent, requiring no explicit enumeration. His core argument isn’t just that a Bill of Rights is unnecessary, but that it risks distorting the Constitution’s intent by implying that unlisted rights don’t exist. This reveals his underlying concern with legal formalism—how the act of codifying rights might actually narrow the scope of individual freedoms.
Active Themes
The Importance of the Constitution Theme Icon
Hamilton also warns that adding a Bill of Rights could be dangerous, as listing specific rights might imply that those not mentioned are unprotected. Instead, he argues that the Constitution’s limitations on government power are a stronger safeguard against tyranny than any written declaration of rights. Hamilton declares that the best protection for individual freedoms is a government that remains constrained by law and accountable to the people.
Active Themes
The Importance of the Constitution Theme Icon
Checks and Balances Theme Icon