The first thing is to understand the two positions of Federalist vs Anti- Federalist to comprehend their positions on the matter of prohibition and punishment of teenagers who drive and text at the same time.
Federalists were the first party to be born in the United States under James Madison and Alexander Hamilton. They believed that the original Constitution did not need any ammendments to it and opposed the establishment of a Bill of Rights. They believed in the need to assume the Constitution just as it had been created. Anti-Federalists, on the other hand, with members such as Patrick Henry, believed strongly that the Constitution needed to be reformed because it violated the rights of individuals and of the states members of the Union. They strongly believed in the wrongness of a strong Federal government and believed that power should be given first to the states and to the individual citizens. Citizens came before any centralized power.
Of course, in the case mentioned in the question, about the control of driving and texting and punishments when there is a violation of said laws, a Federalist would support it, believing it to be right without any need for reformation, as the good of the Union and its laws comes before individual rights and desires. But an Anti-Federalist would oppose it as they would say this law does not contemplate the right of the individual to do as he/she sees fit, even over the welfare of the group. They would also argue that the punishment is too strict and that the government oversteps ints powers by punishing the individual when he/she is using his/her rights.
