Final answer:
The party favoring strong state governments insisted on a strict interpretation of the Constitution to prevent the potential abuse of power by the federal government, to keep government closer to the people, and to protect states' rights and personal liberties.
Step-by-step explanation:
The party that favored strong state governments insisted on a strict interpretation of the Constitution because they were concerned about the potential for abuse of power by a strong central government. They believed in limiting the powers of the federal government to those specifically granted by the Constitution. A strict construction of the Constitution meant that any powers not explicitly stated would remain with the states, according to the Tenth Amendment. This view was in line with the Republicans' preference for a government that was closer to the people and more reflective of their wishes, as opposed to the Federalists, who favored a stronger central government.
During the early years of the United States, the strict interpretation of the Constitution by those who desired strong state governments was a response to the fear of an overreaching federal government. This interpretation was seen in actions such as President Andrew Jackson's veto of the Maysville Road bill, which he deemed beyond the powers granted to the federal government.
The belief that a central government should not extend beyond its prescribed constitutional powers was central to this party's philosophy. Political parties, such as the Democrats and the earlier Republicans, believed that adhering to a strict interpretation would protect the personal liberties and states' rights that many Americans valued.