A) lack of a bill of rights CORRECT This was the central objection of the Anti-Federalists. They believed that the Constitution, as written, did not sufficiently protect individual liberties from the potential tyranny of a strong central government. Their demand for a bill of rights was a key factor in the ratification debates, leading to the promise of amendments and the eventual adoption of the first ten amendments in 1791. The Bill of Rights, including freedoms of speech, religion, and the press, directly addressed these concerns and remains a fundamental part of American law.
B) presence of an electoral college INCORRECT While some Anti-Federalists criticized the Electoral College as an undemocratic mechanism for selecting the president, it was not their primary or most widespread objection. The Electoral College was a compromise between those who wanted Congress to choose the president and those who wanted a direct popular vote. Anti-Federalists were more concerned with the overall concentration of power in the federal government and the lack of explicit protections for individual rights, rather than the specific method of presidential election.
C) creation of a bicameral legislature INCORRECT The Anti-Federalists did not uniformly oppose a bicameral legislature; in fact, many state legislatures were bicameral at the time. Their concern was more about the composition and representation in Congress, particularly the potential for the Senate to become an aristocratic body. However, the creation of a two-house Congress was not a major point of contention compared to the absence of a bill of rights. The Great Compromise, which established a bicameral legislature with proportional representation in the House and equal representation in the Senate, was accepted by most delegates at the Constitutional Convention.
D) weakness of the judicial branch INCORRECT Anti-Federalists actually feared the judicial branch would be too powerful, not too weak. They were concerned that federal courts would have jurisdiction over cases involving state laws and that this would undermine state sovereignty. They also worried about the lack of a jury trial in civil cases and the potential for the Supreme Court to become an oligarchic body. The weakness of the judicial branch was not a major objection; rather, the Anti-Federalists saw the judiciary as another instrument of federal overreach.
