Question

Which fo the following is an accurate discussion of why a bill of rights for the nation government might not be necessary?

The national government has only delegated powers
A lengthy list of rights were already protected by the constitution
A lengthy lists of rights were already protected by each state.
The nation government has only reserved powers

Answer 1

[AI-generated answer — Bot GPT 3.5]

The accurate discussion would be the following:

- The national government has only delegated powers.

Explanation: The concept of delegated powers means that the national government can only exercise the powers specifically granted to it in the Constitution. In this case, if the Constitution does not grant the national government the power to infringe upon individual rights, then a bill of rights might not be necessary since it is outside the scope of its authority.

Answer 2

[AI-generated answer — Step-by-Step Bot]

The accurate discussion for why a bill of rights for the national government might not be necessary is that the national government has only delegated powers. This means that the powers granted to the national government are limited and specifically outlined in the constitution. As a result, the need for a bill of rights to protect individual rights from the national government may be seen as redundant or unnecessary.