Participants:
Series Code: LI
Program Code: LI200481A
|
00:27 Welcome to the Liberty Insider.
00:29 This is a program designed 00:31 to bring you up-to-date information 00:34 and analysis of religious liberty developments 00:36 in the US, particularly, but around the world. 00:40 My name is Lincoln Steed, Editor of Liberty Magazine. 00:43 And I want to get into something 00:47 very contemporary in American life 00:51 at the moment, 00:52 but to do so, let me go back a year, 00:55 before BC I would call it, Before COVID. 01:00 That was the last time that I visited Australia, 01:03 and I took the long flight from Los... 01:09 Actually from Chicago, 01:10 I think it was, nonstop to Australia. 01:13 These Airbus 380s... 01:17 No. 01:19 Start again. My memory is failing me. 01:21 I know that they don't let it go 01:23 from Chicago. 01:24 Where did we go from? 01:30 You know, the Airbus 380, 01:31 I know it flies from Texas nonstop to Australia, 01:37 but the Chicago one I think 01:38 we took a flight from Chicago to... 01:41 Anyhow, static in and all. 01:44 I don't want to give untruths 01:47 because all it takes is you're wrong on one thing, 01:48 and then people call up... 01:51 They doubt it. They question everything. 01:54 Right. 01:55 I mean, that's not a fact that means much, 01:57 but it'll sort of signal 01:58 that he's making other stuff up. 02:01 Six, five, four, three, two. 02:07 Welcome to the Liberty Insider. 02:09 This is a program designed to bring you analysis, 02:12 news, and updates on religious liberty events 02:14 in the US and around the world. 02:16 My name is Lincoln Steed, Editor of Liberty Magazine, 02:21 and I want to discuss something that's of great, 02:24 immediate relevance in the United States. 02:27 Supreme Court and who might be on it. 02:31 But to do so let me go back to at least one-year BC, 02:35 Before COVID, 02:37 that was the last time 02:38 that I flew to my homeland of Australia, 02:41 one of those big Airbus 380s, 02:44 amazing double-decker plane 02:46 that's like a cruise ship of the year. 02:49 And on that long, long flight 02:52 that worries a lot of people who haven't done it, 02:55 but it's so long that you sort of develop 02:58 a cycle of watching the movies, eating meals, sleeping, 03:01 and so on and before you know it, 03:03 you're there. 03:04 And leafing through the electronic listing 03:08 of many, many movies, 03:10 I noticed there was one on the life 03:11 of Justice Ginsburg of the Supreme Court. 03:17 Already a legend, 03:19 but because of this film and a subsequent documentary, 03:22 you know, she was almost a household word 03:25 for many people. 03:26 And I watched captivated for a couple of hours 03:30 as I saw the last story of this amazing woman 03:34 who was an activist for women's rights. 03:35 In fact, she famously said, at one point, 03:39 I think it was in response to the question 03:42 of what she wants. 03:43 And she says we women want you men 03:45 to get your feet off our necks. 03:47 That's all we want. 03:50 And it's worth remembering 03:52 that the original Constitution of the United States 03:56 as written did not grant the vote to women, 03:59 of course, slaves as well. 04:01 So amendments to the Constitution 04:04 of partially fixed 04:06 some of the problems of the original document, 04:10 and Ruth Bader Ginsburg really powerfully pushed 04:14 for some of these things. 04:15 Now she was famously credited as being a liberal. 04:19 I think these conservative liberal badges 04:22 are a little demeaning to some of the justices 04:25 because by my judgment, 04:28 there's not a direct correlation 04:31 between the faction 04:33 that puts people onto the Supreme Court 04:35 and the way that they vote. 04:37 Thankfully, God be praised that even to this light point, 04:41 by and large, 04:43 these justices when they're put 04:45 on the Supreme Court and given lifetime tenure, 04:48 and they are trained lawyers 04:51 and judges that they follow the law, 04:55 they follow their conscience and of course, 04:58 as human beings, they have biases, we all do. 05:02 But, you know, thankfully, 05:05 the judiciary have a sense of responsibility. 05:08 And perhaps, 05:09 with the exception of Justice Thomas, 05:11 I think he is an ideologue of the first degree, 05:14 but even then bound by law. 05:16 And I do remember, quite some years ago, 05:20 this thing to Justice Scalia, who was the most outspoken, 05:23 "conservative" on the Supreme Court, 05:27 who had some rather extreme personal views, 05:30 but he told us, he says, 05:32 "You don't have to worry about me," 05:34 he says, "I'm constrained by the law 05:37 and by the Constitution, 05:39 from following through on my views." 05:41 That one of his views, 05:43 which was quite bizarre, really, 05:46 he said famously on two or three occasions 05:49 that he felt that Sunday laws were constitutional. 05:54 I think he came at that 05:55 because the blue laws that still exist in about 20 US 06:01 are a state matter, not a federal matter. 06:05 But, you know, again, 06:08 when I look at the Supreme Court 06:09 at the moment, people are roiled up 06:11 and ready to go to war about 06:13 who will be the next current depending when this is shown, 06:18 but you know, at the moment, 06:19 there's a rush together another justice there 06:21 because if that's not done quickly, 06:23 then the other faction will put their person on. 06:26 By and large, the justices 06:28 having executed laws fairly well. 06:31 There are a few gross exceptions to it 06:35 of course. 06:36 Many people, "the famous Dred Scott" case. 06:42 Back before the Civil War, 06:43 there was a slave called Dred Scott 06:45 that if you read the story, it's very complicated, 06:47 like a lot of legal cases. 06:51 Dred Scott and his wife were both slaves, 06:54 passed between one owner and the other, 06:56 they lived variously and slave and then free states. 07:01 And he had owners who really hardly executed 07:05 the slave relationship with him, 07:07 but still, he was under contract 07:09 or under bondage. 07:11 And so he made application for his freedom. 07:14 And finally, after cases that he said 07:19 that he could have it 07:20 then denied it in another court, 07:22 went to the Supreme Court 07:23 and they said that under the Constitution, 07:26 Dred Scott could not be a citizen, period. 07:30 Now I think they were right on one level, 07:33 because if you read the original Constitution, 07:36 slavery is embedded in the Constitution 07:40 because the concept of property ownership 07:43 still remains the overarching theme 07:46 of the Constitution. 07:48 Very narrowly did they avoid early on deciding 07:52 that only property owners could vote, 07:55 wouldn't have been a universal suffrage. 07:59 But it was a case that offended the abolitionists 08:04 and somewhat directly led to the Civil War. 08:07 That was a bad decision. 08:09 More recently, a couple of decades ago, 08:12 the Supreme Court in case 08:15 that looked at whether Indians could smoke 08:17 a hallucinogenic drug Peyote 08:20 is part of their religious ceremonies. 08:22 It was called the Smith case, they decided that yes, 08:24 they could restrict this 08:26 because this was a generally universal law. 08:29 And so they restricted the religious practices 08:31 of Native Americans. 08:33 Bad case. 08:35 And many Christians today look at Roe v. Wade, 08:40 and the empowerment of abortion 08:44 as being a horrific case. 08:48 Unfortunately, for people of faith 08:50 that it had, at the time, general backing, 08:54 it does line up with the general idea 08:56 of the freedom of the individual 08:58 and the right of self-determination. 09:00 But it led clearly to very immoral 09:03 and gratuitous practices toward the value of human life. 09:07 You could argue easily that this is a court judgment 09:13 that might better not have been. 09:16 But yet, I don't think any of this proves 09:21 that the Supreme Court are the source of troubles. 09:23 You can look at the legislature and over the years, 09:26 many and manifold crazy laws have come out of Congress, 09:31 and the Supreme Court and a number of them 09:33 have exercised their right 09:34 by saying these things were unconstitutional. 09:37 You can look at the presidency. 09:39 And admittedly the modern presidency 09:41 is far more autocratic than the earlier model 09:46 where it was intended 09:48 that he be the executer of the people's laws, 09:52 more and more, we're getting the imperial presidency, 09:56 but even then, generally speaking, 10:00 they're within general law. 10:01 But the President has exercised his right 10:04 to pass executive orders, 10:07 which are stopgap measures that pass laws if you like 10:12 that until they're countermanded 10:13 by the executive or by the legislature 10:17 or by the Supreme Court might held some value. 10:22 But the Supreme Court is not the problem. 10:25 As a Seventh-day Adventist, 10:27 I'm very much guided 10:29 by the words of Ellen White visionary, 10:33 counted as a prophet by Seventh-day Adventists, 10:36 and she says that at the very end of time, 10:39 when the United States does turn its back on 10:43 on principles of freedom 10:44 and religious freedom in particular, 10:46 that it is the legislature 10:48 responding to the clamor of the people, 10:52 whereby legislation on the day of worship 10:56 comes into pass. 10:57 And I feel happy with that 10:58 because even though that's the wrong way to go, 11:02 that tells me that the model that the country was founded on 11:06 will be operative right to the end. 11:08 The people 11:10 working with their representatives, 11:12 that's how it should be. 11:14 There's no question 11:15 rather than by mandate of the president 11:20 or the interference of the Supreme Court. 11:23 The Supreme Court, by definition, 11:26 is hamstrung in legislating from the bench 11:29 as some people say 11:30 because they cannot just decide, 11:33 for example, 11:35 with this court that appears to be 11:38 stacked for conservatives, 11:40 they can't just decide, 11:42 "Well, now we're going to do away 11:43 with Roe v. Wade." 11:44 No, they have to wait till a case bearing on that 11:47 makes its way up through the courts. 11:49 And then they could make a judgment 11:51 whether or not this is unconstitutional. 11:57 The Bible says that at the very end of time, 12:00 the judges pervert justice 12:03 or it puts it in the concept 12:05 of a society that's on collapse. 12:07 I'm thankful that by and large, 12:10 whether it's Justice Ginsburg or the other justices, 12:14 by and large, they are honest judges 12:19 that they look to legal precedent, 12:21 and they're not a wild group of partisans, 12:25 who will do whatever regardless of legal norms. 12:31 Maybe this is a good time to take a break. 12:33 And after the break, we'll come back 12:35 and I want to share with you something 12:36 that I wrote in Liberty Magazine 12:38 on I'm sure I'm mispronouncing a Latin legal term 12:42 that the judiciary follow 12:44 called Stare Decisis, settled law. |
Revised 2020-11-23