Question

question 15 (multiple choice worth 4 points) (02.06 mc) which of the following correctly describes the federalists argument that having three branches of government protected the people? the branches would be responsible for drafting a list of rights to include in the constitution. the branches were unable to create laws that would be enforced at the state level. the branches would represent the former state governments at the national level. the branches were equal in power so that no one branch could control the others.

Explanation:

The Federalists believed in a system of checks and balances. Having three branches (legislative, executive, judicial) equal in power meant that no single branch could dominate. This prevented tyranny and protected the people's rights. Drafting a bill of rights was a demand of Anti - Federalists (not directly related to the three - branch protection argument here). The branches did create laws enforceable at state level (so that option is incorrect). The branches were not meant to represent former state governments at the national level in the context of protection through three - branch structure.

Answer:

The branches were equal in power so that no one branch could control the others.