Talk Story
Documents that never
lose their styleONE WEEKDAY in the summer of 1970, some young newspaper staffers set up a card table on Rodney Square, the downtown hub of Wilmington, Del. Lunch-hour strollers stopped to find out what was going on and we handed them clipboards, asking them to read a statement and sign if they agreed.
It was the year of Kent State, the height of the Vietnam War and civil unrest gripped America. Later that summer, police in riot gear would clear city streets of anti-war protesters. Two summers before, National Guard troops had patrolled this same square after violent race riots had broken out.
So, it was interesting, but not surprising that most people refused to sign our petition. It read: "We believe it is self-evident that all men are created equal and have certain rights, including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Governments, deriving their power from the consent of the governed, are created to guarantee these rights. Whenever any government fails to do so, the people have the right to alter or abolish it and institute a new government."
The words should seem familiar. They are an updated version of the preamble to the Declaration of Independence of the 13 original United States.
A NATIONWIDE survey commissioned by the Columbia Law School recently asked Americans whether the U.S. Constitution included this statement about the proper role of government: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."
According to the poll, more than a third of Americans, 35 percent, agree that the Constitution includes that statement. Less than a third, 31 percent say it doesn't and about a third, 34 percent, don't know if it does or not. The Constitution doesn't include the familiar maxim, of course. It is from Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto.
The survey results were interesting, but not surprising. Communism's fundamental principle is an attractive notion, but it's not constitutional.
ALMOST two-thirds of Americans surveyed knew Supreme Court justices don't serve 12-year terms, although 24 percent thought they did and 12 percent were clueless. Federal judges hold their appointments for life.
A large majority of us, 83 percent, are aware that the Constitution says persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens of this country and of the states in which they reside.
However, only 60 percent know the president cannot suspend the Constitution's Bill of Rights during a time of war or declared national emergency.
None of our rights can be suspended except for the writ of habeas corpus, the procedure by which a federal court inquires into illegal detention and can order prisoners to be released. It's up to Congress to do it, however, not the president or the attorney general.
THE RECENT furor over the Supreme Court's overturning the Internet child pornography law highlighted how little many of us know about the court's role.
When the majority of justices overturned this piece of legislation, they didn't do so to support pornographers. Rather, they found that the law, as passed, was incompatible with the rights the Constitution guarantees for all of us.
The Columbia Law School poll found that a majority of Americans, 57 percent, think if the Supreme Court overruled Roe vs. Wade, abortion would be illegal throughout the United States. Accordingly, a judicial nominee's opinion about abortion has become a litmus test and appointments are a battleground.
Columbia Law Professor Michael Dorf points out that Roe vs. Wade only bans anti-abortion laws, it doesn't require them. If it were overturned, states could pass laws to outlaw abortion, or not -- depending on the consent of the governed.
Each day, headlines remind us that our founding documents aren't quaint or obsolete but central to American life.
John Flanagan is the Star-Bulletin's contributing editor.
He can be reached at: jflanagan@starbulletin.com.