How did the framers of the Constitution of the United States seek to preserve liberty

and prevent tyranny?

Pretty basic question.

Here's the answer I usually get from my students.

Well-professor to protect the individual and minorities against the tyranny of the majority.

They added the Bill of Rights, and they gave the power to enforce those rights to the Supreme Court.

Are my students correct?

The editorial boards of the New York Times or the Washington Post, and many members of the U.S. Congress, would say yes.

Unfortunately, the answer is wrong.

I say unfortunately because it reflects a common misunderstanding of the Constitution,

and that misunderstanding has led to a serious erosion of our freedom.

Let me explain.

Both the Bill of Rights and judicial review, the idea that the courts can decide if a law is constitutional or not,

were hotly debated items when the Constitution was being drafted in 1789.

The Federalists, the group led by Alexander Hamilton, that wanted a national constitution,

opposed including the Bill of Rights.

They feared it would actually undermine what the Federalists regarded as the main protections against tyranny and the document.

The limited nature of the national government itself.

The Constitution did not envision a national government of general jurisdiction,

meaning a government that could do whatever it wanted,

but rather a government of enumerated and delegated powers.

A government that had authority over only specific areas of American life.

...