Which of the following statements best summarizes a major anti-federalist argument against the us constitution

congress lacked the power to enforce its legislation

foreign powers would not respect the us constitution

protections for human rights were not in the us constitution

states were given to to much power over the federal government

PROTECTIONS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS WERE NOT IN THE US CONSTITUTION is the best summarises a major anti-federalist argument against the US Constitution.

Protections for human rights were not in the US Constitution.

Explanation:

The anti-federal law was composed of the diverse elements composed of the constitution because the anti-federalism thought that the stronger the environment threatened the sovereignty of the states.

The monarchic power is centralized in the federal government, the federalists argued in the congress to give more power to the federal government in the states. It would be difficult for the average citizen in the states. The federal government desired to establish the new central government.

C: Protections for human rights were not in the U.S. Constitution

Explanation:

The anti-federalists were against the ratification or the constitution. They believed that human rights need to be protected and that a bill of rights should be added to the constitution. Good luck! ^⩊^

theodore roosevelt challenged william to a duel, whoever won, got their policy sent to congress. it ended up in a stalemate, and both men were injured and sent to the hospital.

i actually have a suggestion instead of an answer, how about next time instead of spending the time to time up the question you take that time and try to figure something out for yourself, do you understand?

explanation:

leave a 5 star and a and brainliest answer if you understand, hope this betters you day, or not i don't really care either way. xd