The Push to Abandon Our Constitution

By Raúl Labrador

Dear Friends,

The Bill of Rights is a shield to guard the people – individuals – against the power, overreach, and abuse of government itself. The freedom of speech, assembly and religion, the right to a speedy trial by a jury of your peers, the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizure, and the right to keep and bear arms to preserve those freedoms – these are for the individual. Each Amendment is a link in the chain that binds government in servitude to the people.

Lately, federal bureaucrats and elected officials are complaining that the Bill of Rights is getting in the way of their big government agenda, chafing uncomfortably under these guarantees of freedom for individuals. They claim the First Amendment is burdensome when it comes to regulating political speech. That’s good. That means our Constitution is working exactly as intended.

The New York Times, once the pinnacle of journalism, recently ran an article blasting the Constitution as dangerous if it could ever allow Donald Trump to become president, and maybe it’s best to scrap the whole thing. The article even called originalist interpretations of the Constitution to be “Constitution-worship.”

Not to be outdone, the New Yorker just a few weeks ago ran an article entitled “Is It Time to Torch The Constitution?” The article included particular interest in expanding the Supreme Court and getting rid of the electoral college – two perennial favorites from the Left when it comes to political daydreams. Cleary there is no shortage of irony in newspapers decrying the freedom of speech protected by the very Constitution they propose to discard.

At the World Economic Forum in Switzerland, millionaire climate czar John Kerry bemoaned the restrictions of the First Amendment as insufficient to ban speech unfavorable to the climate change agenda, or discouraging people from getting vaccinations. Kerry referred to the First Amendment as a “major block” in preventing people from believing the wrong things.

And in the most extreme and hilarious example, California’s Governor Gavin Newsom is supporting censorship of online content including political satire, memes, and parody. In a real-life response, the Babylon Bee, a website known for its wry political wit, sued the state. A court quickly struck down the California law as blatantly unconstitutional. Newsom should have stuck with banning diesel vehicles, natural gas stoves, and plastic straws and grocery bags. If you are passing a law to ban satire, you’ve already lost. You’ve become the mustachioed villain of a Christmas cartoon special trying to take away everyone’s toys.

We’ve seen countless examples of collusion between Big Tech, Big Media, and the weaponization of our own government, attempting to regulate speech by “fact-checking” posts and suppressing content that runs counter to an administrative agenda or pushing content that supports it. Some may say that platforms such as Twitter or Facebook choosing to regulate speech content is their right as a company. However, when Government is in the shadows holding the carrot and stick of regulation, taxes, franchises, and favorable rules, that crosses a very clear line.

It is a fair criticism to say our Republic is not the most nimble form of government. Our system, by design, is not swift in making decisions or taking actions. But the trade-off is the more swiftly a government moves, the more easily it crushes the rights of the individual. In absolutist systems – monarchies, dictatorships and despots of both right and left – protecting the individual is a far lower priority than protecting the state itself and the interests of its agents and their favorites.

Our Republic is specifically designed to do the opposite, and the freedom of speech is rightfully enshrined in the very first Amendment listed. The vitality of our Republic depends on the debate of ideas, not the suppression. The importance of free speech in a free society cannot be overstated and one cannot exist without the other. As Voltaire once wrote, “I wholly disapprove of what you say – and will defend to the death your right to say it.” That’s the whole point.

Our Constitution is seen cynically by some as a handful of gravel into the gearbox of government, especially by those seeking to preserving their own power. However, the proper role of government is to first serve the people and protect their rights in every possible circumstance. We should keep a close watch on politicians and entities who consider any of our constitutional freedoms a roadblock. For them, our liberty is not a priority, and our freedom is an inconvenience.

Best regards,