Participants:
Series Code: LI
Program Code: LI190434B
|
00:03 Welcome back to the Liberty Insider.
00:05 Before the break with my guest, we were really... 00:09 Well, we were disagreeing. 00:12 And it really comes down to what's the public discussion 00:15 in the US. 00:17 What is the role of the Supreme Court, 00:18 the highest legal body versus the President, 00:23 and of course, the people's representatives? 00:26 And there are so many forces at play. 00:29 But in this present discussion 00:30 we're looking at some worrying trends 00:33 on the Supreme Court is exemplified 00:35 by two of your favorite people, 00:37 Neil Gorsuch, Justice Gorsuch 00:40 and Clarence Thomas, 00:43 I couldn't think of his first name for a second. 00:46 Of course, there are other individuals, 00:47 and they all have their little agenda. 00:50 But what more do you want to say, 00:52 I know you have a particular. 00:54 But now one of the directions they're taking. 00:57 Well, first of all, let me finish my statement 01:00 before the break. 01:03 I don't believe that 01:05 this reflects a trend in society, 01:06 I believe that it reflects... 01:08 You think they're creating a society? 01:09 I believe that it reflects essentially 01:12 a conspiracy by conservatives, 01:15 particularly the Christian right, 01:17 to infiltrate the courts, 01:19 and to accomplish their agenda, 01:24 which is very clear. 01:26 If you read their writings, 01:27 it's very clear what they're trying to do, 01:28 and it's very clear. 01:30 They are a minority of society, there's no question about that. 01:34 In fact, they're, I think, 01:36 a decreasing minority of society. 01:38 But they have way more power 01:40 than their numbers would indicate 01:42 because they're very well organized and focused. 01:45 So they have been able to infiltrate the court system, 01:48 and as well as other branches of government, 01:52 but the court system is the most dangerous 01:54 because you particularly in the Supreme Court, 01:56 you have nine people 01:58 who are determining the rights of the whole country. 02:02 So who those nine people are is a very important thing. 02:06 So as far as Thomas is concerned, 02:10 he has developed a lot more, 02:12 he's punching way above his weight lately 02:14 because of the new majority 02:16 and because he has Gorsuch on his side. 02:19 Well, you know, I like the... 02:21 Not so much like, 02:23 but I can respond to conspiracy comments. 02:26 But, you know, we need to look at it another way. 02:29 It's not secret. 02:32 The rise of the religious right, 02:34 in my view, it really, 02:36 they really started to appear in the '70s 02:38 as a separate politically oriented organization, 02:42 and it's not all Christians. 02:44 But it's Christians with a political agenda 02:49 and a willingness to use political means 02:51 to accomplish spiritual purposes. 02:53 And I tried to tell people, in my view, 02:56 as a Seventh-day Adventist, 02:57 I share most of the concerns 02:59 of the so-called religious right. 03:02 They're not unusual concerns, 03:04 they're very consistent with what a Christian would have. 03:07 They have embraced the wrong solution, 03:10 which is political power. 03:12 And since they are a minority, 03:15 they've been forced to reduce to extraordinary, 03:18 "conspiratorial means to accomplish it." 03:23 And as they see themselves as more and more rather 03:27 of an endangered minority, 03:29 then they do extraordinary things. 03:31 They're sort of gaming the system whenever they can. 03:34 That's what I see. 03:35 Well, I agree with you to some extent. 03:38 I think, though, 03:42 that some of their motives are moral. 03:44 I will, you know, and some of their aims 03:46 I essentially agree with, but many of them are not. 03:51 The racial component this particularly become obvious 03:55 in the last few years. 03:56 Well, yeah, but I wasn't getting into that. 03:58 The US story is light and dark. 04:02 It's aspirational with the Constitution. 04:04 But I love history, outside of history, 04:07 is a dirty undercurrent of racism 04:10 and jingoism and of moneyed interest 04:15 against the poor and so on. 04:17 If you want to attract that, it's bad. 04:19 And Christians, through the whole US history 04:22 have used theology 04:24 to justify some of the worst things. 04:26 And you're inheriting a lot of that. 04:28 And you and I were talking earlier about 04:30 even the dominionist view, 04:31 which is very strong in the Christian right now. 04:34 You know, that's a rape the earth sort of an approach 04:38 and do what you want because I have the power, 04:41 God gave it to me, 04:42 it's sort of the Protestant analog 04:44 to the Catholic entitlement. 04:46 You know, the inherent, 04:50 I'm trying to think of the word they use, 04:52 the inherent power given to, supposedly, 04:56 to Peter by Jesus, 04:57 and so you can dispose it as you want. 04:59 This is all problematic. 05:00 But, you know, I think we have to acknowledge the simple fact 05:04 that from the beginning, this was an overwhelmingly 05:07 Protestant society, 05:10 which it still is demographically barely. 05:15 But within that, 05:16 there is a smaller and smaller group 05:18 who are active about their Protestantism, 05:21 and they see it as sort of the lost, 05:23 borrowing from the Civil War, 05:25 the lost cause, 05:26 and they want to recapture America. 05:30 Well, it's full of some bad people, my churches, 05:35 any churches, that, you know, you can't judge the whole 05:38 on some mixed motives. 05:40 But generally speaking, 05:41 I think their trouble that the loss of faith, 05:44 the ebb of this mythical, religious Americana, 05:49 and they want to recapture it. 05:51 So their mistake is not the views they hold, 05:54 their mistake is that they, as all minorities, 05:58 sometimes become revolutionaries. 06:00 You know, the revolutionary first waves the flag 06:02 rally to meet people, when they don't, 06:05 then you start attacking the villages. 06:08 There's an element of that, 06:09 I think it could be very dangerous against America 06:12 as a whole for these people 06:14 to recapture what they see as America. 06:16 And this is what you're describing 06:17 on the court, 06:18 basically a fifth column on the court, 06:21 to subvert it, they think to a higher end. 06:25 Well and that, and Thomas's other viewpoint 06:29 really plays into that. 06:31 Thomas believes that the Establishment Clause 06:34 does not apply to the States. 06:36 And that's, 06:37 there's a lot of technical reasons for that, 06:40 but basically... 06:41 Well, before the 14th Amendment, 06:43 that would be a true, wouldn't it? 06:44 Well, essentially, it would be, 06:46 but there are two aspects to that. 06:48 First of all, he believes that the Establishment Clause 06:51 was not intended to be a personal right, 06:53 it was intended to be essentially a States' rights, 06:56 which I think ignores the historical evidence. 07:00 And the second part of his argument 07:02 is that the 14th Amendment, 07:04 which was adopted after the Civil War, 07:07 to protect the rights of the former slaves 07:12 has been interpreted by the court to apply almost 07:16 all of the Bill of Rights to the States. 07:20 He believes that was improper 07:21 and should not have happened in that. 07:24 The framers of that amendment didn't intend that. 07:28 Well, that also ignores a lot of historical evidence 07:31 that the framers intended all eight of the first... 07:35 All eight Amendments of the Bill of Rights 07:37 to apply to the States. 07:41 So he takes establishment out. 07:43 Now, establishment is the first clause 07:47 of the First Amendment. 07:49 And it's with 07:51 a whole bunch of other clauses... 07:52 Congress shall make no law establishing religion. 07:54 Right. 07:55 It's bundled with a bunch of other clauses 07:59 that clearly refer to individual rights. 08:01 So I don't understand how he can say 08:05 that antiestablishment is not an individual right. 08:08 And then even if you do say that, 08:10 then you have to look at the framers 08:12 of the 14th Amendment. 08:14 And it seems to me it's clear that they intended 08:17 that the Establishment Clause 08:20 as well as the other amendments 08:23 in the Bill of Rights apply to the States. 08:29 I mean, you're correct. 08:30 I agree with you on this, and it's very worrying. 08:32 Where does this leaders, 08:34 what do you think is the immediate consequence 08:36 of his view? 08:37 Well, that's a good question. 08:39 What's the present danger we have from a changed idea 08:42 which is not good? 08:44 I think 08:49 because Gorsuch has seen fit 08:52 to take Thomas's doctrine 08:56 and slip it into a decision as if it were the law. 09:00 That is an extremely disturbing concept 09:04 because that takes one man's opinion 09:06 and makes it essentially a majority opinion. 09:09 And I don't know whether he will be able to do that 09:12 with any of, either of, Thomas's doctrines, 09:16 but it's very disturbing possibility. 09:19 And just the fact that he has Gorsuch on his side 09:21 is disturbing as well 09:23 because Gorsuch is a much better advocate 09:25 for the positions than Thomas's. 09:27 Let me really play constitutional, 09:28 what is with you? 09:30 You know, there's a lot of foolish talk. 09:32 I think it's foolish because of present realities 09:35 of impeaching the President. 09:38 I mean, certainly allowed in the Constitution. 09:40 People forget, Supreme Court justices 09:42 could be impeached too. 09:44 Do you think an overreaching court 09:46 could ever so on an issue like this, 09:49 so offend the constituency 09:52 that they would do in responding them? 09:55 Well, I don't know. 09:57 It's very hard to say. 10:00 But it's not beyond the realm of possibility, 10:04 but I think it's highly unlikely 10:06 it's never happened. 10:07 And I don't see any reason why it would happen now. 10:13 Not too long ago while flying coast to coast, 10:16 I paid the necessary few dollars, 10:19 slipped my card through the reader 10:21 and intending to watch 10:22 some entertaining diversion on the TV, 10:26 I instead ended up watching the confirmation hearings 10:30 of the most recent acquisition to the Supreme Court, 10:33 their opinions pro and con, as you would expect, 10:36 but I was horrified 10:38 at the style of the proceedings. 10:40 I was horrified at the antagonism shown 10:44 toward how the court would function. 10:48 I was horrified at the outbursts 10:51 from any number of people 10:53 not excluding the nominee himself. 10:56 And I realized that we have reached the point 10:59 where people see the judicial process 11:02 as basically a sideshow 11:03 or an example of sort of politics run amok. 11:09 I hope that reason decisions prevail, 11:13 and I hope that at least the scales of justice 11:16 recognize the touch of the Master's justice, 11:20 and not just human sensibilities, 11:23 biases, and partisan expectations. 11:28 For Liberty Insider, this is Lincoln Steed. |
Revised 2019-05-10