WEBVTT - An Early Independence Day Special! 0:00:01.840 --> 0:00:06.120 Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio the George 0:00:06.200 --> 0:00:10.240 Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty. 0:00:10.160 --> 0:00:17.240 Armstrong and Jettie and He Armstrong and Yetty. 0:00:24.079 --> 0:00:29.360 Goodness sakes, what a day. The crew has taken the 0:00:29.360 --> 0:00:32.360 week off next week to enjoy Independence Day in a 0:00:32.400 --> 0:00:34.800 little summer fun, family time. 0:00:34.760 --> 0:00:35.680 Travel, etc. 0:00:36.159 --> 0:00:40.040 Today is the last show obviously, before that Jack is 0:00:40.080 --> 0:00:44.200 winging his way toward Florida with his boys, and I 0:00:44.240 --> 0:00:46.760 decided I would love to talk to Tim Sander for 0:00:46.800 --> 0:00:49.440 the Vice President for Legal Affairs at the Goldwater Institute 0:00:49.840 --> 0:00:54.760 about the Declaration of Independence. Independence Day and one of 0:00:54.800 --> 0:00:57.800 my favorite books. Tim wrote, The Conscience of the Constitution, 0:00:58.920 --> 0:01:00.600 the Declaration of Independent and it's in the right to 0:01:00.640 --> 0:01:04.600 liberty and by coincidence, today is also the day that 0:01:04.640 --> 0:01:07.920 the Supreme Court is handing out rulings right and left. 0:01:08.240 --> 0:01:09.920 Tim Sander for joys Is, Tim, how are you. 0:01:10.600 --> 0:01:12.000 I'm just great. Thanks for having me back. 0:01:12.480 --> 0:01:13.479 Oh, it's always a pleasure. 0:01:13.880 --> 0:01:15.760 Have you gotten a chance to take in some of 0:01:15.800 --> 0:01:18.840 the Scotis' recent issuances. 0:01:19.440 --> 0:01:21.240 I had to skim some of them, and. 0:01:22.959 --> 0:01:29.520 This universal injunction decision is really unfortunate. It's a bad ruling, 0:01:29.680 --> 0:01:33.920 and honestly, it's a really stupid ruling because here's the 0:01:33.959 --> 0:01:36.920 thing so universal injunctions. That's when a plaintiff goes to 0:01:36.959 --> 0:01:40.080 court and says the government is doing something unconstitutional, and 0:01:40.120 --> 0:01:43.760 the judge says, that's right, the government must stop doing 0:01:43.760 --> 0:01:48.920 this unconstitutional thing. That's a universal injunction. What the opponents 0:01:48.920 --> 0:01:51.280 of universal injunctions complain about is they say, well, why 0:01:51.280 --> 0:01:54.240 should a judge in California be able to bar the 0:01:54.280 --> 0:01:57.520 federal government from doing something in Florida. And the answer 0:01:57.560 --> 0:02:01.560 to that is because it's unconstitutional. What the ruling today 0:02:01.640 --> 0:02:05.160 says is now the California federal judge can only issue 0:02:05.160 --> 0:02:08.720 a ruling barring the unconstitutional thing from happening to the 0:02:08.840 --> 0:02:13.200 particular people in that particular lawsuit. Well, of course, that's 0:02:13.280 --> 0:02:16.880 how injunctions work anyway. So all that this ruling says 0:02:16.919 --> 0:02:20.080 today is that the judge has to write in his opinion, 0:02:20.280 --> 0:02:22.960 I'm only saying this applies to the plaintiffs in this lawsuit. Well, 0:02:22.960 --> 0:02:25.320 of course, everybody knows that's already the rule. It's just 0:02:25.360 --> 0:02:27.320 that the federal government has to follow the law. So 0:02:27.360 --> 0:02:30.080 if it's doing something in Florida, that's unconstitutional in California. 0:02:30.120 --> 0:02:33.960 It's still unconstitutional wherever it's happening, so it's illegal. So 0:02:34.160 --> 0:02:37.840 it's really just creating this weird new formality in how 0:02:37.919 --> 0:02:41.600 courts go about enforcing the Constitution and justice. Jackson, in 0:02:41.680 --> 0:02:45.760 her dissenting opinion, has it exactly right. She says, now 0:02:45.800 --> 0:02:50.160 a court's power to prevent constitutional violations comes with an asterisk. 0:02:50.560 --> 0:02:51.519 A court can make. 0:02:51.400 --> 0:02:56.720 The executive cease its unconstitutional conduct asterisk, but only with 0:02:56.800 --> 0:02:59.480 respect to the particular plaintiffs named in the lawsuit before them, 0:03:00.000 --> 0:03:02.960 being the government free to violate the constitutional rights of 0:03:03.000 --> 0:03:04.160 anyone and everyone else. 0:03:04.440 --> 0:03:08.160 It's a terrible thing, and it's just anyway. It's frustrating 0:03:08.400 --> 0:03:08.680 by it. 0:03:09.760 --> 0:03:12.760 No, because there's been a lot of talk among the 0:03:12.800 --> 0:03:16.919 conservative legal community about trying to stop nationwide injunctions because 0:03:17.240 --> 0:03:19.720 a lot of conservative lawyers and judges are scared of 0:03:19.760 --> 0:03:22.720 what they call activist judges. I am not scared of 0:03:22.720 --> 0:03:25.840 activist judges. I'm scared of judges getting things wrong, whether 0:03:25.880 --> 0:03:29.920 it be conservative or liberal judges getting things wrong. But activists, 0:03:30.320 --> 0:03:33.960 there's no It's much worse to have a passive judge 0:03:33.960 --> 0:03:37.120 who does nothing right. That's much worse when the government 0:03:37.160 --> 0:03:39.800 does something unconstitutional and you go to a judge that 0:03:39.880 --> 0:03:42.160 get them to stop, and the judge says, oh, I'm 0:03:42.200 --> 0:03:44.440 not I'm just gonna let them do whatever. 0:03:44.520 --> 0:03:46.720 I'm not going to be active. That's terrible. 0:03:46.760 --> 0:03:49.760 That's Kilo versus New London, right where the government comes 0:03:49.800 --> 0:03:51.840 along and steals your house to hand over to Kyo 0:03:51.960 --> 0:03:54.720 or something, and the court stands back and refuses to 0:03:54.720 --> 0:03:55.720 host the constitution. 0:03:56.120 --> 0:03:58.440 That's a passive judge. That's not what we want. 0:03:58.480 --> 0:04:01.960 We want judges to be active in enforcing the constitution. 0:04:02.320 --> 0:04:04.080 We don't want them to be wrong, of course, but 0:04:04.120 --> 0:04:05.800 we don't want the Congress or the president to. 0:04:05.840 --> 0:04:06.520 Be wrong either. 0:04:06.600 --> 0:04:09.119 So the idea that what we want is a passive, 0:04:09.520 --> 0:04:12.040 non activist judiciary is just crazy. 0:04:12.560 --> 0:04:12.760 Right. 0:04:12.880 --> 0:04:16.360 So, people who object to the high number of these 0:04:16.360 --> 0:04:19.919 injunctions and how they've interfered with federal policy, that's in quotes. 0:04:19.960 --> 0:04:21.600 I mean, you can agree with that or not. 0:04:22.120 --> 0:04:24.320 The answer is that's why we have the appeals process, 0:04:24.360 --> 0:04:26.599 and it'll be fine, just give it a little time. 0:04:27.400 --> 0:04:28.200 Yep, exactly. 0:04:28.240 --> 0:04:29.880 And the reason why we have so many of these 0:04:29.920 --> 0:04:32.400 injunctions going on right now is because the president is 0:04:32.400 --> 0:04:34.039 doing so many unconstitutional things. 0:04:34.160 --> 0:04:38.520 That's why, Oh, look at you say. If you expected pandering, 0:04:38.560 --> 0:04:41.520 you're not going to get it here. So the specific 0:04:41.560 --> 0:04:44.680 reason I invited Tim to be on the show today 0:04:44.960 --> 0:04:48.800 is we're leading up to Independence Day July fourth, and 0:04:50.640 --> 0:04:52.960 I know how much you like to talk about the 0:04:52.960 --> 0:04:56.960 Declaration of Independence liberty in general, and one of my 0:04:56.960 --> 0:04:59.000 favorite books of years, as I mentioned, was The Conscience 0:04:59.040 --> 0:05:01.359 of the Constitution, which, to my horror, came out like 0:05:01.400 --> 0:05:06.279 eleven years ago. I know, why did you write the book? 0:05:06.960 --> 0:05:08.360 What argument are you making? 0:05:09.200 --> 0:05:12.080 Well, So for I'll preface this by saying, if you 0:05:12.200 --> 0:05:14.160 like this book, you'll be excited to know I've got 0:05:14.160 --> 0:05:16.880 a new book about the Declaration of Independence that's schedule 0:05:16.920 --> 0:05:20.280 to come out next year, in time for the universtieth anniversary. 0:05:20.360 --> 0:05:22.719 I just finished what I hope is the final draft 0:05:22.720 --> 0:05:25.800 of it, and I hope people will read and enjoy 0:05:25.839 --> 0:05:28.560 it about the history of the declaration and what exactly 0:05:29.080 --> 0:05:32.599 are all of the grievances talking about, and what exactly 0:05:32.640 --> 0:05:35.599 Britain was doing, because it really bothers me that people say, oh, 0:05:35.680 --> 0:05:37.800 it's just a fight over a text on tea, and 0:05:37.839 --> 0:05:42.600 they ignore that British colonial rule really was oppressive and tyrannical. 0:05:42.720 --> 0:05:44.080 But that aside. 0:05:44.080 --> 0:05:46.880 The reason I wrote Conscience of the Constitution is to 0:05:47.200 --> 0:05:50.279 argue that the Declaration of Independence isn't just a piece 0:05:50.320 --> 0:05:54.839 of political rhetoric. It's law. It's the law of the land. 0:05:55.240 --> 0:05:57.919 It is as much the law as the Federal Constitution 0:05:58.040 --> 0:06:01.720 itself is law. And we tend to kind of shrug 0:06:01.760 --> 0:06:04.640 that aside for a couple of reasons. In fact, worse 0:06:04.680 --> 0:06:09.839 than that, when Barrett was at her confirmation hearing, she 0:06:10.000 --> 0:06:13.880 was directly asked, is the Declaration of Independence law? And 0:06:13.920 --> 0:06:16.920 she answered no, Well, she would have flunked MI con 0:06:17.000 --> 0:06:20.040 law class for some of that. The Declaration of Independence 0:06:20.080 --> 0:06:22.400 is a statute. It was passed by the Continental Congress. 0:06:22.400 --> 0:06:25.240 It's in the Statute Books, Volume one, page one of 0:06:25.279 --> 0:06:27.960 the United States Code, Declaration of Independence. 0:06:28.120 --> 0:06:29.239 And for good reason. 0:06:29.360 --> 0:06:33.680 It sets forth the principles that make our government justify 0:06:34.520 --> 0:06:37.240 that make it a legitimate government instead of just an 0:06:37.360 --> 0:06:42.599 arbitrary rule. And those principles are equality of rights, individual liberty, 0:06:42.920 --> 0:06:45.719 limited government, the people rule, and so forth. 0:06:46.520 --> 0:06:50.000 How do you suppose somebody is learned and intelligent as 0:06:50.440 --> 0:06:52.480 justice Barrett would come to that conclusion. 0:06:53.160 --> 0:06:55.480 Well, so I mentioned earlier that a lot of our 0:06:55.520 --> 0:06:59.040 conservative friends are so scared about judicial activism, and so 0:06:59.200 --> 0:07:02.240 they think the way to fight back against judicial activism 0:07:02.640 --> 0:07:05.440 is to say that judges are never supposed to draw 0:07:05.680 --> 0:07:06.480 any kind. 0:07:06.279 --> 0:07:09.760 Of moral or normative distinctions. 0:07:10.080 --> 0:07:13.120 That judges are supposed to be just as Chief Tess 0:07:13.280 --> 0:07:17.560 Robert said, we're just umpires calling balls and strikes. And 0:07:17.840 --> 0:07:21.960 that theory is that the Constitution has no moral direction 0:07:22.280 --> 0:07:24.960 to it, that it's just sort of this value neutral 0:07:25.080 --> 0:07:29.360 framework for democracy, and that's not correct. The Declaration of 0:07:29.360 --> 0:07:33.320 Independence tells us that the Constitution has a moral direction 0:07:33.520 --> 0:07:37.160 to it, and that is that individual freedom is the 0:07:37.240 --> 0:07:43.480 primary political value, not democracy. And today we're so propagandized 0:07:43.520 --> 0:07:47.120 to to believe that democracy is the most important thing 0:07:47.160 --> 0:07:50.040 about our system that we forget that, in fact, the 0:07:50.600 --> 0:07:52.840 word democracy doesn't even appear in the Constitution of the 0:07:52.920 --> 0:07:55.880 United States. On the contrary, the reason we have a 0:07:55.880 --> 0:08:01.960 constitution is to limit democracy, to prioritize individual rights over 0:08:02.160 --> 0:08:03.080 majority rule. 0:08:03.600 --> 0:08:07.280 But because that seems to lead to judicial activism, a 0:08:07.320 --> 0:08:07.840 lot of our. 0:08:07.720 --> 0:08:11.280 Conservative lawyers and judges don't like the Declaration of Independence, 0:08:11.280 --> 0:08:16.040 particularly Justice Scalia. Justice Scalia had this sort of fight 0:08:16.120 --> 0:08:18.160 with Thomas over this issue. 0:08:18.200 --> 0:08:20.080 Thomas is a pro Declaration. 0:08:19.640 --> 0:08:23.280 Of Independence justice and Scalia was anti Declaration of Independence. 0:08:23.640 --> 0:08:25.360 And the reason why was because Scalia thought it led 0:08:25.400 --> 0:08:28.680 to judicial activism. And Justice Thomas believes, at least to 0:08:28.720 --> 0:08:32.640 some degree, in natural rights, that there really are individual 0:08:32.720 --> 0:08:36.320 rights and government must respect those in all cases. And 0:08:36.400 --> 0:08:39.360 so there's a very interesting opinion. They were called Troxel 0:08:39.400 --> 0:08:45.400 versus Granville, where Scalia agreed with Thomas except for two sentences, 0:08:45.400 --> 0:08:47.520 and he specifically said he did not agree with those 0:08:47.520 --> 0:08:49.880 two sentences, and those are the two sentences where Justice 0:08:49.880 --> 0:08:53.400 Thomas quotes the Declaration of Independence. So it's really this 0:08:53.480 --> 0:08:56.080 is not just a bunch of abstract theorizing. This relates 0:08:56.080 --> 0:08:59.280 to how the government actually operates in daily, day to 0:08:59.320 --> 0:09:02.320 day work. Whether you believe, really believe in the principles 0:09:02.320 --> 0:09:05.080 of the declaration, or whether you just recite them without 0:09:05.120 --> 0:09:05.880 thinking what they mean. 0:09:06.760 --> 0:09:10.560 Right, And I certainly count myself among those who believe 0:09:10.559 --> 0:09:15.560 in the principles fervently. I don't know exactly how to 0:09:15.559 --> 0:09:18.679 ask this question, but on a practical level, you said, 0:09:19.040 --> 0:09:22.280 you know, the Declaration is a law. The first Really, 0:09:23.720 --> 0:09:27.680 on a practical level, as I look at the truths 0:09:27.679 --> 0:09:29.280 that we hold to be self evident that all men 0:09:29.320 --> 0:09:31.600 are created equal, that they aren't doubted by their creator, 0:09:31.640 --> 0:09:34.160 with certain unalienable rights, among these life, liberty, and the 0:09:34.200 --> 0:09:38.800 pursuit of happiness. Do I then look at everything that 0:09:38.880 --> 0:09:44.400 happened after that through the lens of that declaration and 0:09:45.000 --> 0:09:47.280 assess whether it holds true. 0:09:47.120 --> 0:09:48.120 To those principles or not. 0:09:48.160 --> 0:09:50.320 I mean, on a practical level, how do I use 0:09:50.360 --> 0:09:52.240 the declaration as law? 0:09:53.200 --> 0:09:55.920 Well, the declasion is a very broad law. A lot 0:09:55.920 --> 0:09:58.079 of One of the things that this brings up an 0:09:58.080 --> 0:10:00.599 interesting point. So a lot of the reason whylawyers or 0:10:00.679 --> 0:10:03.040 judges say the decoration is not laws because they say, well, 0:10:03.040 --> 0:10:03.880 it doesn't have any kind of. 0:10:03.880 --> 0:10:05.199 An enforcement mechanism. 0:10:05.200 --> 0:10:07.800 And usually laws say, you know, if you run the 0:10:07.960 --> 0:10:09.920 stop sign, you'll get a ticket, you know, and there's 0:10:09.960 --> 0:10:11.720 there's some sort of punishment involved. 0:10:12.040 --> 0:10:13.560 But that not all laws do that. 0:10:13.920 --> 0:10:17.120 Laws that say how you write a will or how 0:10:17.120 --> 0:10:19.400 you get married, those the laws don't contain any kind 0:10:19.400 --> 0:10:22.000 of punishment to them. And yet there's still laws, right 0:10:22.559 --> 0:10:24.200 And in a lot of the time what law does 0:10:24.280 --> 0:10:28.240 is it announces broad, abstract principles that the government should 0:10:28.280 --> 0:10:31.200 aim at. For example, here's an example I use in 0:10:31.200 --> 0:10:34.240 my in the book that's coming up soon, there's a 0:10:34.320 --> 0:10:38.640 law that declares how the International Space Station program should operate, 0:10:38.679 --> 0:10:41.960 and it says in there, in all cases, the government 0:10:42.000 --> 0:10:44.920 shall prioritize the following considerations. 0:10:45.480 --> 0:10:47.160 Well, there's that's still a law, right. 0:10:47.920 --> 0:10:49.920 The generation of Independance is kind of like that. The 0:10:49.960 --> 0:10:54.200 Declaration says everything the government does is legitimate only if 0:10:54.400 --> 0:10:57.600 it respects the principles of almon are created, equal with 0:10:57.679 --> 0:10:59.840 fundamental rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit. 0:10:59.520 --> 0:11:03.199 Of happiness and so forth. And that's obviously. 0:11:02.920 --> 0:11:05.840 The most important time that that was ever applied is 0:11:05.880 --> 0:11:08.439 in the controversy over the Civil War, right in talking 0:11:08.480 --> 0:11:11.600 about whether or not the Constitution guarantees slavery or not. 0:11:12.720 --> 0:11:16.840 That turns on whether you think black people qualified as 0:11:16.920 --> 0:11:20.320 part of the people of the United States as part 0:11:20.360 --> 0:11:22.040 of the one people referred to in. 0:11:21.960 --> 0:11:23.000 The Declaration of Independence. 0:11:23.040 --> 0:11:25.840 And when you read Lincoln and Douglas and their debates 0:11:26.400 --> 0:11:29.000 over the meaning of the Constitution and slavery, they're constantly 0:11:29.040 --> 0:11:32.280 referring to the Declaration. The dread Scott opinion itself talks 0:11:32.280 --> 0:11:34.880 about whether the Declaration of Independence means what it says, 0:11:35.160 --> 0:11:38.400 So of course, this is a crucial element in analyzing 0:11:38.400 --> 0:11:42.120 whether government is doing something justly, and that's why you 0:11:42.200 --> 0:11:46.720 find the Declaration quoted in cases involving affirmative action programs 0:11:46.760 --> 0:11:49.960 like the recent Harvard case. Just as Thomas says, the 0:11:49.960 --> 0:11:51.800 Declaration of Independence is part of our law. 0:11:51.920 --> 0:11:53.400 It says all men are created equal. 0:11:53.720 --> 0:11:57.439 These kinds of racist government policies violate that principle. 0:11:58.679 --> 0:11:59.000 Wow. 0:11:59.040 --> 0:12:02.199 Interesting, So I don't want to get hung up on 0:12:02.240 --> 0:12:03.360 the point, and we need to take a break. But 0:12:03.720 --> 0:12:07.600 so what would you say to somebody who's defending a 0:12:07.600 --> 0:12:11.160 policy that you found to be antithetical to the themes 0:12:11.200 --> 0:12:16.320 of the declaration? Would you declare it undeclarational or what 0:12:16.360 --> 0:12:17.800 would do your objection sound like? 0:12:18.440 --> 0:12:22.480 Maybe the Declaration informs how we interpret the Constitution, which 0:12:22.520 --> 0:12:24.880 informs how we understand the law, and so it's kind of, 0:12:24.960 --> 0:12:27.560 you know, it's like multiple layers here. So if a 0:12:27.640 --> 0:12:30.800 question comes up about whether something violates the equal protection 0:12:30.960 --> 0:12:34.240 of the laws, which the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution protects, 0:12:34.559 --> 0:12:36.240 then we look back at what do we mean by 0:12:36.280 --> 0:12:39.360 equal protection? Do we is it okay for government to 0:12:39.400 --> 0:12:42.280 give some people an advantage over others based on the 0:12:42.320 --> 0:12:45.080 color of their skin. Well, that turns on whether what 0:12:45.120 --> 0:12:47.839 we what do we mean by the people of the United. 0:12:47.600 --> 0:12:49.160 States who are citizens? 0:12:49.160 --> 0:12:53.560 What is the substantive values that the law is protecting 0:12:53.600 --> 0:12:55.880 and enforcing here and understand that we have to read 0:12:55.880 --> 0:12:59.480 the declaration and understand also the context of declaration was 0:12:59.520 --> 0:13:03.240 written in, which is the principles of classical liberal political 0:13:03.240 --> 0:13:06.400 philosophy that underlie the American Revolution. 0:13:06.960 --> 0:13:09.760 I wanted to get into that very thing, the origin 0:13:09.800 --> 0:13:12.080 of the declaration, why was written? And why was written 0:13:12.120 --> 0:13:14.280 the way it was in a moment or two. Tim Sandifer, 0:13:14.400 --> 0:13:21.760 the Goldwater Institute. Much more to come an extended conversation 0:13:21.880 --> 0:13:24.480 this hour with Tim Sanderfer, vice president for Legal Affairs 0:13:24.520 --> 0:13:29.120 with the Goldwater Institute, about the Declaration of Independence. As 0:13:29.200 --> 0:13:32.320 Independence Day approaches rapidly, Tim, this is a short segment, 0:13:32.360 --> 0:13:35.120 and I hesitate to ask one of the big questions 0:13:35.120 --> 0:13:36.679 in a short segment, but what the heck? Will get 0:13:36.720 --> 0:13:41.080 started and see how it goes. Why was the Declaration 0:13:41.240 --> 0:13:45.400 of Independence written? Why not just say I'm out listing 0:13:45.440 --> 0:13:47.439 all those grievances. Did they just not want to make 0:13:47.800 --> 0:13:48.800 King George mad? 0:13:48.880 --> 0:13:49.920 Or what? What was the purpose? 0:13:50.480 --> 0:13:54.880 So between the people, forget that the American Revolution was 0:13:55.200 --> 0:13:57.959 a very long process. It actually began in seventeen sixty 0:13:58.040 --> 0:14:01.600 four when Parliament passed law called the Sugar Act, which 0:14:01.640 --> 0:14:04.760 was the first attempt by Parliament to impose taxes on 0:14:04.800 --> 0:14:08.320 the colonies. And for over a decade there were these 0:14:08.440 --> 0:14:13.520 angry disputes over Parliament's authority over the American colonies, and 0:14:13.800 --> 0:14:16.880 Americans insisted that they were loyal to the King, but 0:14:17.160 --> 0:14:19.720 not to Parliament. And they were very consistent about this, 0:14:19.800 --> 0:14:21.040 that Parliament had no authority to. 0:14:21.040 --> 0:14:22.120 Pass laws over them. 0:14:22.520 --> 0:14:25.560 That's why Parliament isn't even mentioned in the declaration. Instead, 0:14:25.600 --> 0:14:29.520 they used the phrase a jurisdiction. A power foreign to 0:14:29.600 --> 0:14:32.280 our jurisdiction is the phrase they use. They don't even 0:14:32.280 --> 0:14:34.320 want it to use Parliament's name in the Declaration of 0:14:34.320 --> 0:14:37.120 Independence because they say it has never had any authority 0:14:37.120 --> 0:14:40.560 over America. But the King started saying no, no, Parliament 0:14:40.640 --> 0:14:45.320 is what governs the colonies. And so after years and 0:14:45.400 --> 0:14:47.360 years of begging the king to change his mind, and 0:14:47.440 --> 0:14:51.440 he kept ignoring them, finally he made He sent armies 0:14:51.480 --> 0:14:54.400 to the United States started making war on Americans. 0:14:54.440 --> 0:14:56.080 And so they said, all right, we're. 0:14:55.880 --> 0:14:58.440 Done having any kind of loyalty to the king also, 0:14:58.720 --> 0:15:01.800 and they had to issue a declar that explained why 0:15:01.920 --> 0:15:04.280 and what they were fighting for. And so that's why 0:15:04.360 --> 0:15:06.840 they wrote the declaration. But it was the last of 0:15:06.880 --> 0:15:11.120 a long series of documents that explained the causes of 0:15:11.480 --> 0:15:15.160 a dispute between America and Britain, you know. And so 0:15:15.200 --> 0:15:17.000 you have to understand that history to get what they're 0:15:17.040 --> 0:15:19.680 referring to when they list all their grievances against Parliament 0:15:19.680 --> 0:15:20.120 and the King. 0:15:20.920 --> 0:15:22.760 But it seems to me it was a message to 0:15:22.840 --> 0:15:25.320 the Crown in Parliament. It was a message to other 0:15:25.480 --> 0:15:27.800 countries who may or may not be helpful, and a 0:15:27.800 --> 0:15:29.640 message to the American people as well. 0:15:30.320 --> 0:15:32.360 Yes, and that last part is really important. 0:15:32.400 --> 0:15:35.160 A lot of people overlook the fact that the Continental 0:15:35.160 --> 0:15:38.320 Congress was speaking to Americans also. They weren't just speaking 0:15:38.360 --> 0:15:41.280 to Britain, and they weren't just speaking to France and 0:15:41.320 --> 0:15:44.800 other countries. They were explaining to Americans themselves what it 0:15:44.840 --> 0:15:47.760 is we're fighting over. And that's why Jefferson tried to 0:15:47.800 --> 0:15:52.520 put in a provision damning slavery as evil, because he thought, 0:15:52.600 --> 0:15:54.880 maybe if I can sneak this provision in here, it 0:15:54.920 --> 0:15:58.160 will sort of force Americans to view slavery as un 0:15:58.160 --> 0:16:02.080 American and that would allow enable us to later abolish slavery, 0:16:02.080 --> 0:16:03.960 and unfortunately that tactic didn't work. 0:16:04.600 --> 0:16:07.160 Yeah, I want to get into that in particular next segment, 0:16:07.200 --> 0:16:08.680 when we'll have a lot of time to stretch out. 0:16:08.680 --> 0:16:10.560 But I think it's one of the more insidious lies 0:16:10.600 --> 0:16:13.720 of for instance, the sixteen nineteen project that claims that 0:16:13.760 --> 0:16:16.160 the country was founded on slavery and the founding fathers 0:16:16.160 --> 0:16:17.920 were big fans of it. A lot of them spoke 0:16:18.000 --> 0:16:20.280 openly of its evil and how they had to get 0:16:20.360 --> 0:16:21.440 rid of it somehow. 0:16:22.120 --> 0:16:23.200 That's right, that's right. 0:16:24.320 --> 0:16:27.240 Tim Sanver of the Goldwater Institute on the line. We 0:16:27.280 --> 0:16:29.720 are going to come back after a brief break full 0:16:29.760 --> 0:16:34.040 of fascinating and helpful commercial messages and continue on our 0:16:34.040 --> 0:16:36.320 discussion of the declaration of Independence. I want to get 0:16:36.320 --> 0:16:41.240 into Thomas Jefferson's role, what got left out, who fought 0:16:41.280 --> 0:16:46.320 for what, because like every process that's ever happened in 0:16:46.360 --> 0:16:50.080 this country, it was full of bloody knuckles and differing 0:16:50.120 --> 0:16:52.040 opinions and that sort of thing, which is why I 0:16:52.320 --> 0:16:56.920 love this place so much. And Tim also mentioned that 0:16:56.920 --> 0:16:58.640 he's working on a book soon to come out about 0:16:58.640 --> 0:17:02.560 the Declaration of Independence. I'm for the anniversary thereof, so 0:17:02.720 --> 0:17:05.280 we will discuss that and much more. Also get back 0:17:05.320 --> 0:17:07.760 to some of the Supreme Court decisions and check in 0:17:07.760 --> 0:17:11.920 with Jack from Sonny Humid, Florida. I think before long 0:17:11.960 --> 0:17:12.600 stay with us. 0:17:12.880 --> 0:17:18.520 Glad you're here. Thanks, Armstrong and Getty. Welcome. 0:17:19.359 --> 0:17:21.720 Tim Sanderfers the vice president for Legal Affairs with the 0:17:21.760 --> 0:17:25.440 Goldwater Institute, longtime friend of the Armstrong and Getty show. 0:17:25.520 --> 0:17:28.879 And we're doing a slightly premature independence stage show just 0:17:28.880 --> 0:17:32.280 because we are off next week and I really really 0:17:32.280 --> 0:17:36.240 wanted to, so here we are. I was centering the 0:17:36.320 --> 0:17:39.080 discussion i'd planned to around Tim's twenty fourteen book, The 0:17:39.080 --> 0:17:41.600 Conscience of the Constitution, The Declaration of Independence, and the 0:17:41.680 --> 0:17:44.960 Right to Liberty, But he unleashed on us the news 0:17:45.000 --> 0:17:48.000 that you're working on a new book on a somewhat 0:17:48.080 --> 0:17:48.959 similar topic. 0:17:49.560 --> 0:17:53.119 Yes, I'm doing a book called Proclaiming Liberty, which is 0:17:53.160 --> 0:17:56.040 about the writing of the Declaration, what it means, and 0:17:56.080 --> 0:17:58.640 then you know, going clause by clause to the Declaration, 0:17:58.720 --> 0:18:01.840 explaining what each of the references are, and then concludes 0:18:01.880 --> 0:18:04.560 with sort of a my slap at the sixteen nineteen 0:18:04.600 --> 0:18:07.640 project should be out in April of twenty twenty six 0:18:07.760 --> 0:18:11.679 in Times for the bisis Sessquit Tenniel whatever they call. 0:18:11.680 --> 0:18:15.800 Them, right right, Yeah, give the sixteen nineteen project a 0:18:15.840 --> 0:18:18.640 good solid slap if you can. We mentioned just before 0:18:18.680 --> 0:18:23.680 the break, Tim mentioned that Thomas Jefferson, who allegedly wrote 0:18:23.680 --> 0:18:27.280 the Declaration of Independence, wanted a clause in there about 0:18:27.280 --> 0:18:31.000 the need to eliminate slavery, which it runs so counter 0:18:31.080 --> 0:18:35.280 to some of the woke narratives these days. First of all, 0:18:35.600 --> 0:18:39.879 to what extent was this a solo writing project by 0:18:39.960 --> 0:18:40.800 Thomas Jefferson? 0:18:41.119 --> 0:18:44.080 And what else was fought over? What to leave in, 0:18:44.160 --> 0:18:45.359 what to leave out? What should we know? 0:18:45.920 --> 0:18:46.120 Oh? 0:18:46.240 --> 0:18:49.080 Yeah, So it's a wonderful and complicated story, which I'll 0:18:49.119 --> 0:18:52.640 get into in my book. But yes, Jefferson was the 0:18:52.680 --> 0:18:55.919 primary draftsman on a committee of five, and really it 0:18:55.960 --> 0:18:59.439 was primarily him. John Adams and Benjamin Franklin were primarily 0:18:59.480 --> 0:19:02.040 responsible for Franklin was six, so he was working from 0:19:02.080 --> 0:19:04.560 home and so they didn't really consult him very often, 0:19:04.920 --> 0:19:08.000 and so it was primarily Jefferson and Adams, and Jefferson did. 0:19:07.920 --> 0:19:08.600 The first draft. 0:19:08.640 --> 0:19:11.040 He wrote it in about two weeks and you know, 0:19:11.440 --> 0:19:13.520 got or two days, I'm sorry, and had it all 0:19:13.840 --> 0:19:15.600 ready to present to them, and then they added and 0:19:16.119 --> 0:19:18.280 took some things out, and then presented it to the 0:19:19.080 --> 0:19:21.240 Congress as a whole, which then went over it all 0:19:21.240 --> 0:19:23.760 over again, editing it, taking things out and putting things 0:19:23.800 --> 0:19:26.119 and all that sort of stuff. And he had wanted 0:19:26.119 --> 0:19:29.480 to include an attack on the slave trade. Jefferson when 0:19:29.480 --> 0:19:31.639 he was he was already young. He was one of 0:19:31.640 --> 0:19:34.040 the youngest members of the Continental Congress in seventy six. 0:19:34.560 --> 0:19:38.240 But even before that he had been in his colonial legislature, 0:19:38.480 --> 0:19:41.280 and he had tried to get laws passed restricting the 0:19:41.400 --> 0:19:46.280 trade in slaves as a first step to attacking slavery itself. 0:19:46.920 --> 0:19:50.360 And because you know, you got to get your camel's 0:19:50.359 --> 0:19:52.879 nose under the tent, right, And that was the plan. 0:19:53.600 --> 0:19:58.720 And that failed because the King issued in order saying 0:19:59.280 --> 0:20:02.159 colonies made not pass any kinds of restrictions on the 0:20:02.200 --> 0:20:05.879 importation of slaves, because he said, because that harmed the 0:20:05.920 --> 0:20:08.720 profits of the Royal Africa Company, which was the Imperial 0:20:08.800 --> 0:20:13.040 Slave Trade Corporation. And so when he got a chance 0:20:13.040 --> 0:20:15.520 to write the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson says, well, I'm 0:20:15.560 --> 0:20:17.840 going to include an attack on the King for blocking 0:20:17.880 --> 0:20:20.439 our efforts to limit the slave trade. And what he 0:20:20.480 --> 0:20:23.560 wrote was the single longest passage in the Declaration of 0:20:23.640 --> 0:20:27.400 really passionate paragraphs. I mean, he's using all capital letters 0:20:27.440 --> 0:20:32.159 and underlining things because he was really into this, and 0:20:32.240 --> 0:20:35.159 he was partly hoping to persuade his fellow Americans to 0:20:35.280 --> 0:20:38.439 see slavery as an evil thing that could be blamed 0:20:38.440 --> 0:20:41.800 on Britain. Now today we say, oh, how silly for 0:20:41.920 --> 0:20:45.399 him to blame Britain for providing Americans with slaves when 0:20:45.440 --> 0:20:47.840